report on the november 2020 election in michigan

REPORT ON THE NOVEMBER 2020 ELECTION IN MICHIGAN

21

and more importantly, there has been no evidence provided that such a purported connection led to alterations to machine programming, hardware, or the tabulated results or could have led to such changes. Finally, logic and accuracy tests are conducted on each tabulator prior to the election to confirm that pre-election procedures were followed properly. During the post-election audits, clerks verify that those tests were performed and that the machines and their programming were not tampered with during the election.

Many theories and speculation regarding tabulators not at the TCF Center also include a component that necessitate an internet connection. It is particularly important to note that Dominion voting machines that are not part of an absentee voter counting board do not have built in modems or wireless internet. Reports to the contrary are false, with some falsely labeling non-Dominion machines as Dominion machines to make it appear as if they do have wireless internet capabilities. The secure cellular modems some clerks use to transmit the unofficial results to the county clerk are not even turned on or connected to the tabulators until after the official results are printed by the individual machine.

Tabulator/Software IntegrityThere is no link in the election process chain more susceptible to unprovable and un-refutable speculation and suspicion than those involving the invisible lines of code and panels of circuits. These vulnerabilities can include tampering with machine code on site, via cyber attack, or by malicious programming by the proprietors of the machines.

There are many theories as to how compromising the integrity of the machines and software could have taken place, making it impossible to delineate each one separately. However, the answers and evidence against nearly all theories is generally the same. Reasonable deduction and logic stand to refute nearly all possible outcomes of a hack or attack, including the following theories: whether files including ballot images were hacked, a malicious algorithm was installed to switch votes, or a hostile, foreign force obtained a connection into a tabulator before, during, or after the election. In all of these situations, a simple recount or re-tabulation by the machine, after a logic and accuracy test, or by hand would demonstrate the theory to be consistent or inconsistent with the facts. This has been undertaken in multiple jurisdictions, both those in question and those not, all providing verification of the original, official results. Not one of these efforts demonstrated a problem with the tabulators or the software. There is no evidence to suggest the original, official results reflected anything but what was marked on the ballots.

Videos and reports of the ease of hacking current Dominion voting machines from outside of Michigan, e.g. Georgia, never demonstrated a vulnerability of the vote counting software or the tabulators. The chair contacted various officials from Georgia to understand the testimony and events in question there. Particularly, the testimony of Jovan Pulitzer, which purported to have on-the-spot access to manipulate voting files and vote counts, has been demonstrated to be untrue and a complete fabrication. He did not, at any time, have access to data or votes, let alone have the ability to manipulate the counts directly or by the introduction of malicious software to the tabulators. Nor could he spot fraudulent ballots from non-fraudulent ones. Notably, Georgia did conduct a complete, statewide, hand recount that validated the tabulators’ official results.


22

Many of the theories surrounding cyber attacks were consolidated into the visuals and narratives included in the “Absolute Proof” video series first presented in January 2021 and continuing into June 2021 by Mike Lindell (the video relied heavily on the situation in Antrim County and the report from ASOG). In summary, Mr. Lindell claims that attacks by foreign and domestic enemies were successful in obtaining access to the computers containing results at local and county clerks’ offices, as well as the secretary of state. In some cases, the supposed access included the actual tabulators.

However, this narrative is ignorant of multiple levels of the actual election process. Upon completion of the election, tabulators print the final results on paper. Clerks then connect a modem and transmit by secure, cellular connection or transfer by flash drive the unofficial results to the county clerk.3 County clerks then report these unofficial results both locally and to the secretary of state. The secretary of state releases the unofficial results to media and their own page. Clarity, a Spanish based company, also takes in these unofficial results from the county or the state. This company, which is based in Spain and has servers in Europe, makes the unofficial results available to multiple users, especially media subscribers who utilize the unofficial results in their election night prognostications. Scytl and others are companies that provide similar services. All of these activities, especially due to media inquiries, constitute a significant explanation for much of the cyber activity across the country and the globe on election night.

Terminologies about the equipment used in elections leads to much of the confusion, particularly when used carelessly. Various documents, emails, and manuals discuss connectivity and servers. Certain persons have used these as proof that tabulators were connected during the election. However, the capabilities of the machines do not denote all of those options were operating during the election itself. Server connections and vulnerabilities, even errors, at clerk’s offices are not indicative that tabulators themselves were vulnerable or hacked. The presence of IP addresses do not prove votes were altered or programming was hacked. Servers have nothing to do with regular tabulators during the election.

While the clear and constant presence of cyber criminals is real, the exchange of “packets” of information between two computers speaking to each other is not evidence of successful hacking or changing of data. Moreover, it is not possible for anyone to now determine what might have been in those packets of information unless granted specific access to one of the two computers involved in the transaction. All the while, the official results remain on a printed piece of paper at the local clerk’s office and are not alterable to any reverse cyber attack. Most importantly, the paper ballots in the box are available for re-tabulation or recount at any time. Where this was done, no evidence of hacking or attack was ever shown. Nor did any official representative of the losing party call for a hand recount in any precinct so to prove an instance of such. If the losing party had been so confident of any of these cyber attack theories or software-based vote switching, simply asking for several hand recounts or re-tabulations in the various precincts would have demonstrated a genuine hack had happened and that there was necessity for additional recounts and investigations.

3 ES&S and Hart InterCivic tabulators have internal modems, but not Dominion. However, they are not turned on until the polls are closed and tabulation has concluded. It is worth noting that these machines will likely have to be recertified, depending on whether they have 4G or 5G capabilities when the technology changes.


23

Further, the graphics and charts in various videos claim very specific access and vote count changes in specific counties across Michigan but do not provide any references or evidence to demonstrate how that information was acquired. As mentioned above, once the data is transmitted, there is no way to know what was sent without access to a computer on either side. No clerk or election official in any of these counties was informed how these numbers were calculated or known (except the numbers shown for Antrim County, which mirror the numbers shown to have occurred by human error). While showing these numbers is compelling, there is no source provided, but the viewer is led to believe Mr. Lindell’s experts have received access to each of these counties’ or precincts’ computers and discovered a connection and hack occurred along with exactly what data was transmitted. No such activities took place at any of these locations with which the Committee had contact.

The chair spoke with clerks in several of the counties listed by Mr. Lindell’s experts. These clerks had no explanation for numbers his reports show as being flipped votes, nor had they had any interaction with any persons making these allegations. Moreover, clerks in these counties performed random hand recounts in various precincts or townships and found zero change to the official, canvass results. Other clerks did full county re-tabulations and found zero change. For these actions to not contradict Mr. Lindell’s allegations would mean all the clerks surreptitiously or incidentally chose precincts or townships that were not involved with the hack his experts claim occurred or allowed their tabulators to be compromised. The Committee finds this is beyond any statistical or reasonable credulity.

Canvassing and Out of Balance PrecinctsThe canvassing process that is conducted at the county level in each of Michigan’s counties always serves as the check on most irregularities that may occur during the initial tabulation. If paper ballots are significantly unbalanced when compared with the number of votes reported in poll books, this constitutes a clear indication that something went wrong. Often, the imbalance arises when workers do not immediately account for the necessity of copying overseas ballots or damaged absentee voter ballots. It also occurs when a voter decides to leave the polling place without correcting a spoiled ballot or submitting their ballot. Other causes come from empty absentee voter ballot envelopes, or couples including both of their ballots in one envelope.

Some of the highly out-of-balance precincts at consolidated Absentee Voter Counting Boards (AVCB) were likely from mistakes made with the high-speed tabulators, something that several citizens swore to have witnessed in affidavits and other testimony. When these imbalances appear after Election Day, it is the board of canvassers, or in Wayne County, their chosen agent, the clerk, that can make the decision to perform a further review to correct any irregularities that are discovered. Re-tabulation of the paper ballots and a thorough examination of the poll books are critical parts to the canvass process, allowing the books and ballot boxes to reach balance.

Technically, the imbalances that remain after the canvass could exist due to fraudulent activity. Unbalanced precincts are unfortunate and are something that should be addressed in the future. However, the unbalanced precincts in Michigan counties were marginal and, in no way, would have impacted the outcome of the Presidential election. There were fewer precincts with an imbalance


24

in this election than in previous ones. Developing best practices and training election workers on how to maintain balanced precincts is recommended. There is much discussion on allowing some out-of-balance precincts to be eligible for recount but testimony the Committee heard from several clerks indicated they did not support this. Therefore, the Committee makes no recommendations on this issue.

The Committee did learn during testimony that Wayne County’s Board of Canvassers operates differently than most other counties, shifting the actual canvass responsibilities to the county clerk and their staff. Once the canvass is complete, the board receives a report, that is unusually anemic in its details of how imbalances were rectified. This is unfair to those serving on the board, as well as the voters of Wayne County, despite being permitted by law. A transparent canvass, overseen by those not responsible for the actual election process, allows citizens to understand how imbalances occurred and how they were rectified while having confidence that there was not a conflict of interest for those preforming the canvass.

Canvassers ought to be intimately involved in the process and the law should be changed to provide consistency and transparency in the canvassing process. Furthermore, it would be wise to allow for larger boards in higher population areas and to provide additional time to complete the canvass to rectify any irregularities.

7. Signature Verification ProcessThe Committee was made aware of claims that election workers at the TCF Center in downtown Detroit were instructed to not match signatures on envelopes and furthermore were instructed to “pre-date” the received date of absentee ballots. To the contrary, these processing steps — signature matching and verification of the date received — occurred at another location and were completed by other employees prior to the time the ballots were sent to the TCF Center for counting. Workers at the AVCBs are to check for the clerk’s signature and time stamp as well as making sure the voter signature is present. However, the validation of the voter signature by the clerk’s office is indicated by the clerk’s signature and stamp. As for the “pre-dating” allegation, Detroit Senior Election Advisor Chris Thomas explained this date field is necessary for processing the ballot. Without the voter present, there is no way to have that date, which was recorded into the QVF by the official who took the same day registration at another location. Since the poll books at the AVCB are not connected to the QVF during Election Day, there is no way to check what was entered at the site where the voter registered. Therefore, a “placeholder” date is entered, and the poll worker assumes the official accepting the registration did their due diligence.

Kent County Clerk Lisa Lyons, and Ingham County Clerk Barb Byrum, both testified regarding the possible requirement of a “real time” signature when applying for an absentee ballot, indicating it would be highly preferred rather than performing the application process online. In addition to the preferences of election officials, the Michigan Court of Claims struck down Secretary of State Benson’s guidance on signature matching, which required workers to presume the validity of signatures, ruling that the required presumption of validity is found nowhere in state law and mandating such was a direct violation of the Administrative Procedures Act.


25

After reviewing these facts and receiving the testimony of experts and clerks, it is abundantly clear that the signature verification process is one of significant importance. With new policies in place due to the adoption of Proposal 18-3, current election procedures do not require a new voter to, potentially, ever make face-to-face contact with an election official or staff throughout the process of registration, requesting an absentee ballot application, or completing and submitting their ballot. Therefore, requiring a voter to confirm their identity at some point during the process is imperative. Whether providing a “real time” signature, a government-issued photo identification card, or other unique personally identifying information, like a driver’s license number or a state identification number, requesting that a voter provide one of these easily-accessible identifiers will go a long way to strengthen the integrity of our system, while supporting the new, more efficient way of administering our elections.

Therefore, the Committee recommends that the secretary of state begin the process of establishing actual rules for examining and validating signatures consistent with a ruling of the Michigan Court of Claims. The Committee also recommends that statewide measures be put in place to ensure eligible voters are not unreasonably denied access to vote if there is an issue with their signature. Finally, the Committee recommends that reasonable measures be put in place to ensure voters can easily and properly identify themselves when exercising their right to vote.

8. Jurisdictions Reporting More Than 100% Voter TurnoutThe Committee received and heard claims that jurisdictions had more than 100% of registered voters voting. Here are some of the local municipalities that had claims of a higher voter turnout than there were actual registered voters:

Municipality Claim Actual

Oneida Township 118% Approximately 80%

Zeeland Township 460.51% Precincts ranged from 74.46% – 84.80%

Spring Lake Township 120% Precincts ranged from 66.74% – 84.15%

Gladwin Township 215.21% 67.23%

Summit Township Over 100% 71%

Detroit More Votes than Voters (Trump Claim)

250,138 votes = Under 50% of registered voters in the city and only

37% of the total population.


26

9. Absentee Ballots Were Tabulated Multiple Times, Increasing Vote TotalSome individuals claimed that many ballots were counted multiple times when they were re-submitted through the high-speed tabulation machines. The Committee heard from several persons and read many affidavits claiming to have first-hand knowledge that this issue occurred. Investigation does show it is possible to cycle a completed stack through the tabulator multiple times as long as no errors occur. Bundles of ballots go through the tabulator so quickly that a simple jam or other error necessitates the entire bundle being restarted. Workers cannot restart the stack unless they first clear the partial count and start from zero by pressing a button.

If ballots were counted multiple times, this would have created a significant disparity in the official pollbook. This was the testimony of several witnesses, including Chris Thomas and Monica Palmer, Republican chair of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers. Specifically, the pollbook would show that many more votes were cast than the number of people obtaining a ballot. This was the case at several counting boards at the completion of the original tabulation. However, the actual imbalances that remained after the canvass show this problem was rectified. Rectifying precincts where this mistake happened is usually not difficult to do and involves taking the ballots out of the box, counting the total number to see if it matches the poll book, and processing all the ballots through the tabulator again. The balanced poll books and the remaining imbalances do not indicate this problem any more, showing it was corrected. Remaining imbalances are likely connected to some of the other reasons addressed in finding number six, namely, empty envelopes, ruined ballots, etc.

The Committee recommends that tabulator companies develop machines that place tabulated ballots into a box that has no access for poll workers while placing uncounted ballots in another tray to be checked and placed in the tabulator when ready. This would assure such an error cannot occur and that no reset and restarting of a full stack is necessary.

10. Thousands of Ballots Were “Dumped” at the TCF Center on Election Night/The Next Morning Several individuals testified and claimed that tens of thousands of ballots were “dumped” at the TCF Center on election night, when reported vote tallies showed that President Trump was still in the lead. They allege this occurred between 3 – 5 a.m. and that they were brought onto the floor to be counted. Chris Thomas, the senior elections advisor for the city of Detroit, stated he estimated 16,000 ballots were delivered to the TFC Center around that time. Some other persons and media speculated it was nearly 100,000, but most reported about 30,000-45,000. These ballots were submitted throughout Election Day at different locations, such as drop boxes, in the mail, and at the clerk’s main and satellite offices. After the ballots were compiled and processed at the clerk’s office, after the closing of polls at 8 p.m., they were brought to the TFC Center for counting. These ballots were not brought in a wagon as alleged, but via delivery truck and then placed on carts. A widely circulated picture in media and online reports allegedly showed ballots secretly being delivered late at night but, in reality, it was a photo of a WXYZ-TV photographer hauling his equipment.


27

Others claimed that the TCF Center security camera footage around the same time showed some type of “ballot dump.” While the video in question confirms that a number of ballots were delivered at the time alleged, it provides no evidence of fraudulent or wrongful conduct. In the video, the van arrived around 3:30 a.m. and unloaded the absentee ballots. Once unloaded, the van left around 3:55 a.m. to go back to the satellite office where the processing was occurring. The van arrived back once again around 4:30 a.m. to unload the final ballots.

This theory, like many of the other theories proposed as evidence of fraud, does not constitute actual evidence on its own. Those drawing such conclusions in their affidavits and testimony were asked to provide proof that something illegal actually occurred but no proof that ballots were fraudulent was provided or found by the Committee in testimony or in subpoenaed records. However, this situation does raise issues with the delayed and cumbersome process of obtaining absentee ballots from drop boxes on election night, when many other activities and processes are also ongoing. The Committee recommends that drop boxes not be utilized or be closed earlier than 8 p.m. on Election Day so that the time taken to collect such ballots will not, by necessity, extend processing and tabulating of such a large volume so long into the night. At the least, appointed staff should be on-hand to immediately collect ballots from drop boxes at 8 p.m. Additionally, the process of transferring ballots from the clerk’s office to other locations must be done with greater security and manifests so that there can be an accounting for each ballot sent and received between the two locations, establishing a chain of custody.

11. Vote Totals Were Abnormal Compared to Past Presidential Elections and Other Vote Count IrregularitiesSeveral claims were made regarding the voter turnout in the November 2020 election in which the statistical data was cited as a source to show widespread election impropriety. Comparing historical results casts serious doubt over any claims of widespread impropriety in the Michigan 2020 election. In fact, turnout in 2020 increased less in Wayne county (11.4%) than in the rest of the state (15.4%) and President Trump won a greater percentage of votes there than he did in 2016 (30.27% vs 29.3%).

Additionally, the data suggests that there was no anomalous number of votes cast solely for the President, either in Wayne County or statewide:2020 2016Statewide StatewidePresident: 5,539,302 President: 4,799,284Senate: 5,479,720 Congress: 4,670,905Difference: 59,582 (1.08% difference) Difference: 128,379 (2.67% difference)

Wayne WaynePresident: 874,018 President: 782,719Senate: 863,946 Congress: 754,560Difference: 10,072 (1.15% difference) Difference: 28,159 (3.60% difference)


28

Other IrregularitiesSeveral published reports, particularly “Case for Michigan Decertification” presented charts of vote sub-totals and totals that were adjusted during the night and sometimes subtract votes from previous totals. The report also shows the increase in absentee votes tabulated was greater than the usual amount able to be processed in the given time frame. These reports require partial or incremental vote counts and totals. Finally, the report included final vote counts that include enormous spikes of final votes with a very high percentage for one candidate. Attempts by the chair to acquire the sources and citations of this data from the author were not able to be fulfilled. The author insisted that he cannot answer the questions about the origins of these data points, which he uses as evidence, without others investigating the issue or granting him access to a wide range of materials.

The reports containing these impossible mathematical counts rely on partial or incremental vote counts which are not available from any county or state official. Detroit does set up its own, unofficial vote reporting site. Incremental vote counts are reported during the process at the TCF Center. This additional level of complexity for reporting and handling, along with corrective actions that may be occurring onsite after an incremental data dump, can lead to multiple inaccuracies and discrepancies. There is additional confusion about counts and potential increases or decreases as the city merges actual precinct votes with AVCB votes. Allowing Detroit to announce partial or incremental vote counts when no other community does, does not promote a uniform, statewide system. Further, not aligning each AVCB with each precinct creates an additional, complexity leading to an unnecessary vulnerability for errors in the unofficial, election night vote reports. Finally, media outlets frequently make substantial errors or propagate the errors of others and then must adjust and retract data.

Large spikes in the vote count are not necessarily unexplainable or unusual. They do not alone constitute evidence of fraud and can be reasonably expected. Large precincts, particularly with the highest absentee voter turn out ever, took much longer to complete and then reported all their results at once. Further complicating this issue is that the absentee voter ballots counted at a consolidated counting board had to be merged with the votes submitted on Election Day at the corresponding, in- person voting precincts. This makes the spike larger than just the final count from the AVCB. No evidence has been presented to refute this as the legitimate reason for the dramatic jumps in vote counts seen in Michigan.

Regardless, the Committee can only speculate on this because the author of the referenced report cannot provide sources that the Committee can pursue. Without provision of a source to investigate from the author, and as no confirmation of these numbers was provided nor can be ascertained, the Committee does not believe a wide-ranging, blanket allowance to search materials is justifiable or responsible, particularly in light of the extent of the post-election state audit performed and the lack of red flags from the final results in Detroit or Wayne County.


29

12. Additional Issues

Ballot Box ConstructionTestimony was heard from Monica Palmer regarding the roll of boards of canvassers in verifying the construction of ballot boxes. Her board made significant efforts to require repairing or replacing poorly constructed boxes. This effort is commendable and ought to be extended to the construction of drop boxes, as well. Testimony was also shared that boxes disallowed by the Wayne County Board of Canvassers and labeled to not be used were still being used on Election Day. This is not acceptable, and the Committee asks the secretary of state or the attorney general to investigate who is responsible for this serious breach.

Modem Usage on TabulatorsTestimony was given regarding the wisdom and necessity of modems for vote tabulators. There was not consensus amongst the clerks and the Committee makes no recommendation at this time. However, the external, detachable modem does provide a reassuring and genuine physical barrier to cyber attacks during the voting process.

Ballot HarvestingTestimony and allegations of ballot harvesting were made, although no evidence of such was presented. Ballot harvesting has been caught at times in the past, but none was in this election. Drop boxes and prepaid postage do present a greater vulnerability to ballot harvesting. Others have made the argument that prepaid postage might also reduce the likelihood of an individual waiting for someone to collect their ballot. It is worth noting that ballot harvesting, while illegal due to its vulnerability to fraud, is not necessarily indicative of fraudulent voting.

Allegations of Illegal Votes Testimony and reports of illegal votes, out of state votes, non-residents voting, and deceased voters are prolific, and the numbers included are substantial and compelling. However, no source or reliable method for determining these numbers is presented. References to “317 voters also voting in other states” do not come with explanation or source. Other numbers reported as evidence of fraudulent addresses or issues with residency fail to consider the complications and realities of same day registration (a real problem in its own right, but one voters created through adopting Proposal 3 in 2018). These same day registrations, also addressed earlier in this report, necessitate methods to enter voters into the database while also flagging them for additional checks and verifications later. This is particularly true at the AVCBs as they do not have access to the QVF and their electronic poll books are disconnected during the election. New registrants need lines filled in, but also must be flagged to be connected with the actual entry made in the QVF by the clerk’s office prior to issuing the ballot. Impossible, and obviously contrived, birthdates serve as a rational and simple method for flagging these voters.

Many of the reports and allegations of illegal votes or fraudulent votes conflate issues of illegal or improper process with fraud or illegal votes. Many of these claims ignore the specific and legally required partisan makeup of the election workers and immediately assume that illegally removing watchers and challengers means fraud is occurring and that all ballots should be disqualified.


30

Not only would this disenfranchise thousands of legitimate voters by no fault of their own, but it demonstrates a significant leap of logic and an unjustified mistrust of the bipartisan poll workers themselves. The outcome alleged to have occurred during these improperly supervised moments, namely the addition of tens of thousands of prepared ballots, would require a conspiracy of immense proportions: individuals at multiple levels and locations, massive resources of ballot production and pollbook manipulation, and an outcome that does not contain a final number count outside the realms of believability. All of this under the noses of hundreds of bipartisan workers and watchers (as not all were ever dismissed) and without a whisper from the huge pool of people who would know. And all of this to theoretically run up the Biden total in a precinct where he traditionally should have expected better than 90% of the vote but received 88% amidst a relatively unremarkable turnout. The Committee finds these postulations strain credulity and are simply preposterous. The Committee also notes this theory would directly conflict with the idea the machines were tampered with to miscount the ballots.

Suspicious CommunicationsCommunications with Dominion to local clerks have been utilized to cause additional fear and mistrust of the company, its equipment, and the election results. While the Committee has not examined or received every document, a small sampling of the most often cited communications are only troubling if considered with the pretext that Dominion is part of a conspiracy to defraud voters. One email after the August primary regarding not saving images is highlighted as evidence of a cover-up. The context in the email, to make electronically transmitting the results after the election with the attachable modem function better, makes the instruction to turn off transmitting the image a reasonable instruction when coupled with there being no law in Michigan to save the images. Emails and communications with Dominion to Antrim County after Nov. 3 are also reasonable as the clerk and others attempted to determine how the tabulators correctly counted the ballots while the clerk’s computer showed them incorrectly. (The saving of ballot images so the ballots can be publicly examined by digital means may be an issue Michigan should consider. Other states are doing this with success.)

Chain of Custody and Election Material SecurityFrequent demands to decertify all or a portion of the vote are accompanied by high sounding language regarding the “chain of custody.” This verbiage evokes images of evidence utilized in trials, such as sealed envelopes and locked evidence rooms with sign-out sheets. However, investigating the claims regarding problems with the chain of custody usually finds highlights about the handling and transmission of the unofficial vote counts and the computer systems used to handle them. While concerns about these systems may be justified, it is incredibly misleading and irresponsible to imply this holds any danger to the official vote counts, the tabulators, or the ballots themselves. Similarly, unfair allegations have been leveled against the secretary of state and county and local clerks regarding the instruction to, and deletion of, e-poll book data. The letter instructing this and the action itself is a standard practice, ordered by the federal government and carried out shortly after every election. The law and the letter sent also provide specific instruction not to do so should there be an ongoing legal action regarding the data. All evidence the Committee found shows the law was followed. The Committee finds insisting this is evidence of a cover up, “Destruction of election artifacts prior to end of 22-month archival requirement,” is incredibly misleading, demeaning, and irresponsible.


31

Confusing TerminologyMany of the allegations simply utilize semantics and the confusing, technical nature of elections to drive up doubt. Claims such as “fake birthdays,” “unsupervised ballot duplication,” “system manuals explicitly refer to internet and ethernet connectivity,” and “unsecured and illegal ballot boxes” are just a sampling of the terminologies used. However, each of these has legitimate explanation. The birthday issue is explained elsewhere in this report and involves same day registrations on Election Day. “Unsupervised ballot duplication” is referring to times challengers were unable to watch or were prevented from watching (which were not legal actions) but is misleading because the bipartisan election inspectors/workers were still watching and verifying each other’s work. “System manuals” refer to connectivity because the machines are specifically designed to be connected to transmit the unofficial results and to be connected for other functions – this is not proof they were connected during tabulation. “Unsecured and illegal ballot boxes” refers to the transporting of absentee ballots to the counting board in postal trays. Sealed ballots have never been considered to need to be in a secured and approved container because the envelops are still sealed. The Committee recommends this practice be made more secure with manifests and a record of custody, but it is wrong to accuse anyone of violating the law that was written to address open ballots, not those in sealed envelopes.

Blank Ballots and Military Ballots The presence of blank ballots also provides significant confusion, despite being necessary for the duplication of military ballots and damaged absentee voter ballots. It is noteworthy that attempting to utilize these ballots for any significant level of fraud would require perfectly matching precincts to voters, manipulating poll books with fake dates for requests and receipts of the ballots, voter’s signatures, and the clerk’s signature and time stamp.

One witness testified that none of the military ballots at her table being duplicated were for President Trump. However, upon questioning, the witness recounted she only witnessed a few dozen ballots. This is a very reasonable outcome given the overall performance of the candidates in these precincts and the amount witnessed, which is not statistically significant.

13. AuditsThe demand for audits regarding the election began soon after the November election and has continued until now. Several entities have undertaken to conduct audits, sometimes referring to their efforts as “forensic audits.” One of these is detailed earlier in this report, particularly in Finding 5. Several lawsuits regarding audits have been filed.

Proposal 18-3, which was approved by the voters of Michigan and amended the state constitution, guarantees every Michigan elector the right to request an audit, stating that each “elector qualified to vote in Michigan shall have…(t)he right to have the results of statewide elections audited, in such a manner as prescribed by law, to ensure the accuracy and integrity of elections.” The central clause, “in such a manner as prescribed by law,” has resulted in the dismissal of demands of citizens to execute this provided right because the audit performed by the Michigan secretary of state was determined to satisfy this right. Much has been made by several persons that the hand recount in Antrim County was not truly an audit. This is, and was, admitted by the secretary


32

of state’s office as true in that it was not a precinct audit, but a risk-limiting audit with a risk limit of zero, because all of the ballots were recounted and not just a sample. Furthermore, this does not diminish the profound value of hand recounting every ballot and race in the county as evidence against fraud or other illicitness. However, the actual, mandated audit detailed below was eventually conducted in Antrim County as it was in all Michigan counties.

The audits performed by the Michigan secretary of state and facilitated by county clerks and local officials has faced significant derision by citizens, lawyers, and activist leaders. The accusation is that the secretary of state has a conflict of interest in the result as it is her role as chief election officer which is being judged. However, such allegations demonstrate a significant lack of understanding regarding the rigor and depth of the audit performed, especially its decentralized nature. Auditing of the results is undertaken and administered by the county clerks, with aid and assistance provided by the local city and township clerks, and is another step removed from the secretary of state. The clerks at each of these levels, excepting municipal, are partisans from both major parties.

The extent of the audit is also critical to understanding its dependability and credibility. There are 66 steps clerks are instructed to undertake in the process. The “Post-Election Audit Manual,” available online at www.Michigan.gov/sos/post_election_audit_manual_418482_7.pdf, lays out several critical points as to purpose and goals. Notably, they include pre-Election Day and Election Day procedures’ fidelity to law and rules. Precincts and races are selected randomly in each county across the state. The audit examines notices, appointments and training, e-Pollbook security, test deck procedures (logic and accuracy testing), military and overseas applications, poll books, and ballot containers. The audit checklist contains 66 points of examination to meet these goals and includes the hand counting of the randomly selected races in randomly selected precincts. Pictured is a completed audit for East Grand Rapids Precinct 5. Citizens can obtain these audit results across the state from their county clerks.


33

The Committee concludes these audits are far from the worthless exercises they have been castigated as being. Many of those criticizing them are misleading concerned citizens to believe the only audit done is the “risk limiting audit.” The risk limiting audit is also performed on top of the major, statewide county audit detailed above. Its purpose is to perform an additional spot check on the accuracy and function of the tabulators, but it is not the main audit done.

The Committee recommends providing live video feed and recordings of the audit procedures. The public should have access to view the audit in person when possible and results should be posted online. The Committee also recommends that the Legislature fulfill the commitment of Proposal 2018-3 to guarantee an audit upon request of any elector.


34

V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONRecommendations

Place in statute the rights and duties of challengers and poll watchers, requiring they be uniformly trained and held accountable.

Ensuring combined AVCBs can have more than one challenger per party, with the ability to replace challengers who exit the AVCB location after the sequester is lifted.

Allow for bipartisan election inspectors for all audits and require the process be open to the public.

Prohibit the unsolicited mailing of absentee voter ballot applications from the secretary of state to limit the potential for non-Michigan residents voting in elections.

Establish signature verification requirements via the administrative rules process or statute in order to provide clarity and uniformity to election workers on the proper way to ensure signatures match.

Require video security on all drop boxes and require all drop boxes be emptied and secured immediately or earlier than 8 p.m. on Election Day to help expedite the processing and tabulation of ballots.

In order to ensure more accurate voter rolls, allow county clerks greater authority when removing deceased individuals from the Qualified Voter File.

Allow for the continued pre-processing of absentee ballots the day before Election Day, so long as stringent security measures are kept in place. Pre-processing must occur on the site of tabulation.

Consider allowing tabulation, which is more secure, to begin in the week preceding Election Day as long as results may not be released until polls are closed on the completion of Election Day.

Require that best practices for maintaining a balanced precinct on Election Day be part of the necessary training for all precinct workers. Establish a public, published record of all clerks who fail to provide the appropriate training or continuing education to themselves or their employees.

Reform the canvassing processes by requiring canvassers be present during the canvass activities, expanding certain county boards where population requires it, and provide for additional time for the process to be completed.


35

Conclusion

The Committee can confidently assert that it has been thorough in examination of numerous allegations of unlawful actions, improper procedures, fraud, vote theft, or any other description which would cause citizens to doubt the integrity of Michigan’s 2020 election results. Our clear finding is that citizens should be confident the results represent the true results of the ballots cast by the people of Michigan. The Committee strongly recommends citizens use a critical eye and ear toward those who have pushed demonstrably false theories for their own personal gain. We also conclude citizens should demand reasonable updates and reforms to close real vulnerabilities and unlawful activities that caused much of the doubt and questionability to flourish and could, if unchecked, be responsible for serious and disastrous fraud or confusion in the future.

Further, we commend the innumerable clerks, canvassers, staff, workers, and volunteers across Michigan that make the enormous complexity of elections operate so smoothly, so often. The complexity of the work and the dedication we discovered are astounding and worthy of our sincerest appreciation. We also commend the diligent citizens that took time to report problems and concerns they saw because they want and value fair and free elections above party or personal gain. If all citizens remain vigilant and involved, we will emerge stronger after any challenging time.

EXHIBIT 2

9/9/

21, 1

1:08

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

sena

tors

file

39

elec

tion

refo

rm b

ills: W

hat's

in th

em

http

s://w

ww.

freep

.com

/sto

ry/n

ews/

polit

ics/

elec

tions

/202

1/03

/24/

mic

higa

n-se

nate

-gop

-ele

ctio

n-re

form

-law

s/69

6331

4002

/1/

8

EL

EC

TIO

NS

Mic

hig

an

GO

P s

en

ato

rs f

ile

39

ele

ctio

n r

efo

rm b

ills

De

mo

cra

ts c

all

ra

cist

, ba

sed

on

lie

sD

av

e B

ou

che

ra

nd

Cla

ra H

en

dri

ckso

nD

etro

it F

ree

Pres

sPu

blis

hed

3:50

p.m

. ET

Mar

. 24,

202

1U

pdat

ed 6

:31

p.m

. ET

Mar

. 24,

202

1

Mic

higa

n R

epub

lican

sen

ator

s jo

ined

a n

atio

nal p

ush

Wed

nesd

ay s

eeki

ng n

ew e

lect

ion

regu

lati

ons

and

rest

rict

ions

,fo

llow

ing

a co

nser

vati

ve m

ovem

ent c

allin

g fo

r ch

ange

s de

spit

e no

evi

denc

e of

wid

espr

ead

voti

ng fr

aud

or m

isco

nduc

tas

soci

ated

wit

h th

e 20

20 e

lect

ion.

Whi

le G

OP

lead

ers

say

the

bills

will

mak

e it

eas

ier

to v

ote

and

hard

er to

che

at, D

emoc

rats

and

oth

er o

ppon

ents

arg

ue th

epr

opos

als

will

res

tric

t vot

ing

and

are

prem

ised

on

lies

perp

etua

ted

by fo

rmer

pre

side

nt D

onal

d Tr

ump

and

his

supp

orte

rs.

The

prop

osal

s dr

awin

g th

e m

ost i

re w

ould

intr

oduc

e ne

w id

enti

ficat

ion

requ

irem

ents

for

requ

esti

ng a

bsen

tee

ballo

ts,

proh

ibit

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

te fr

om m

akin

g ab

sent

ee b

allo

t app

licat

ions

ava

ilabl

e on

line,

ban

cle

rks

from

sup

plyi

ng p

repa

idre

turn

pos

tage

for

abse

ntee

bal

lots

, bar

cle

rks

from

cou

ntin

g ab

sent

ee b

allo

ts in

the

wee

ks le

adin

g up

to th

e el

ecti

on a

ndim

pose

new

req

uire

men

ts fo

r ba

llot d

rop

boxe

s.

Sena

te M

ajor

ity

Lead

er M

ike

Shir

key,

R-C

lark

lake

, sai

d th

e bi

lls a

re in

tend

ed to

mak

e it

eas

ier

to v

ote

and

hard

er to

che

at.

Stat

e Se

n. E

rika

Gei

ss, D

-Tay

lor,

sai

d th

e bi

lls "

put l

ipst

ick

on J

im C

row

" an

d w

ere

raci

st.

"For

our

dem

ocra

tic

syst

em to

wor

k, w

e m

ust e

nsur

e th

e pe

ople

of M

ichi

gan

have

the

abili

ty a

nd o

ppor

tuni

ty to

exe

rcis

eth

eir

righ

t to

vote

and

hav

e co

nfid

ence

in th

e fa

irne

ss a

nd a

ccur

acy

of e

lect

ions

," s

aid

stat

e Se

n. R

uth

John

son,

R-H

olly

,an

d a

form

er s

ecre

tary

of s

tate

.

9/9/

21, 1

1:08

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

sena

tors

file

39

elec

tion

refo

rm b

ills: W

hat's

in th

em

http

s://w

ww.

freep

.com

/sto

ry/n

ews/

polit

ics/

elec

tions

/202

1/03

/24/

mic

higa

n-se

nate

-gop

-ele

ctio

n-re

form

-law

s/69

6331

4002

/2/

8

"Thi

s le

gisl

atio

n in

clud

es c

omm

onse

nse

mea

sure

s th

at w

ill p

rote

ct th

e in

tegr

ity

of o

ur e

lect

ions

by

safe

guar

ding

the

righ

tfo

r pe

ople

to v

ote

and

ensu

ring

our

ele

ctio

ns a

re s

afe

and

secu

re."

Mor

e:M

ichi

gan

com

plet

es m

ost c

ompr

ehen

sive

pos

t-el

ecti

on a

udit

in s

tate

his

tory

: Wha

t it s

how

ed

Mor

e:H

ouse

pas

ses

elec

tion

ref

orm

s ai

med

at c

lean

ing

up v

oter

rol

ls, s

uppo

rtin

g ab

sent

ee v

otin

g

Am

ong

the

prop

osed

cha

nges

con

tain

ed in

the

39 b

ills:

Req

uire

dro

p bo

xes

for

abse

ntee

bal

lots

to b

e ap

prov

ed b

y th

e se

cret

ary

of s

tate

and

the

coun

ty b

oard

of c

anva

sser

s.R

equi

re th

e re

mov

al o

f abs

ente

e ba

llot d

rop

boxe

s us

ed in

the

Nov

embe

r ge

nera

l ele

ctio

n th

at a

ren’

t app

rove

d.Im

plem

ent n

ew r

equi

rem

ents

for

mon

itor

ing

such

box

es. (

SB 2

73)

Allo

w th

ose

betw

een

the

ages

of 1

6 an

d 17

½ t

o pr

e-re

gist

er to

vot

e if

they

mee

t cer

tain

con

diti

ons.

(SB

274

) A

llow

indi

vidu

als

from

eac

h po

litic

al p

arty

to o

bser

ve a

nd r

ecor

d el

ecti

on a

udit

s ca

rrie

d ou

t at p

reci

ncts

and

allo

wcl

erks

to p

rovi

de li

ve v

ideo

cov

erag

e of

cou

ntin

g bo

ards

task

ed w

ith

proc

essi

ng a

nd c

ount

ing

abse

ntee

bal

lots

. (SB

275

)A

utho

rize

ele

ctio

n in

spec

tors

, cha

lleng

ers

and

poll

wat

cher

s to

pho

togr

aph

and

film

the

tabu

lati

on o

f vot

es. (

SB 2

76)

Allo

w c

ount

y cl

erks

to fl

ag d

ecea

sed

vote

rs in

the

qual

ified

vot

er fi

le —

whi

ch h

ouse

s ea

ch v

oter

's in

form

atio

n an

d is

wid

ely

used

for

man

y el

ecti

on n

eeds

— a

nd r

equi

re th

em to

not

ify lo

cal c

lerk

s of

any

peo

ple

who

hav

e di

ed in

the

coun

tyev

ery

two

wee

ks a

nd th

en e

very

wee

k th

e 45

day

s be

fore

an

elec

tion

. (SB

277

)R

equi

re th

ose

colle

ctin

g ab

sent

ee b

allo

ts fr

om d

rop

boxe

s to

car

ry b

allo

ts in

app

rove

d co

ntai

ners

and

req

uire

cle

rks

todo

cum

ent e

ach

tim

e ba

llots

are

col

lect

ed. (

SB 2

78)

Mod

ify th

e nu

mbe

r of

ele

ctio

n ch

alle

nger

s al

low

ed to

obs

erve

abs

ent v

oter

cou

ntin

g bo

ards

bas

ed o

n th

e nu

mbe

r of

abse

ntee

bal

lots

ass

igne

d to

the

boar

d. (S

B 2

79)

Req

uire

the

boar

d of

sta

te c

anva

sser

s to

com

plet

e th

e ca

nvas

s of

an

init

iati

ve p

etit

ion

wit

hin

100

days

aft

er th

e pe

titi

onis

file

d. (S

B 2

80)

Req

uire

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

te to

col

lect

info

rmat

ion

from

mul

tist

ate

prog

ram

s an

d pa

rtne

rshi

ps th

e se

cret

ary

of s

tate

ispa

rtic

ipat

ing

in to

ver

ify v

oter

s' a

ddre

sses

and

reg

istr

atio

n st

atus

. Req

uire

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

te to

pos

t on

the

depa

rtm

ent o

f sta

te’s

web

site

the

num

ber

of v

oter

s w

ho m

oved

out

of s

tate

, the

num

ber

of v

oter

s w

ho c

hang

ed

9/9/

21, 1

1:08

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

sena

tors

file

39

elec

tion

refo

rm b

ills: W

hat's

in th

em

http

s://w

ww.

freep

.com

/sto

ry/n

ews/

polit

ics/

elec

tions

/202

1/03

/24/

mic

higa

n-se

nate

-gop

-ele

ctio

n-re

form

-law

s/69

6331

4002

/3/

8

addr

esse

s, d

uplic

ate

vote

r re

gist

rati

on r

ecor

ds, v

oter

s w

ho d

ied

and

the

resu

lts

of in

vest

igat

ions

con

cern

ing

impr

oper

vote

s am

ong

othe

r in

form

atio

n.(S

B 2

81)

Lim

it w

ho c

an a

cces

s th

e qu

alifi

ed v

oter

file

. (SB

282

)C

hang

e th

e de

adlin

e fo

r co

unty

boa

rd o

f can

vass

ers

to e

xam

ine

ballo

t con

tain

ers.

Allo

w c

lerk

s in

larg

e ju

risd

icti

ons

tobe

gin

proc

essi

ng b

ut n

ot c

ount

ing

abse

ntee

bal

lots

the

day

befo

re th

e el

ecti

on. (

SB 2

83)

Req

uire

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

te to

pro

vide

a r

epor

t to

the

Legi

slat

ure

deta

iling

any

con

trac

ts e

nter

ed in

to fo

r an

ele

ctio

n-re

late

d ac

tivi

ty o

r se

rvic

e. P

rohi

bit t

he s

tate

, cou

ntie

s, c

itie

s an

d to

wns

hips

from

acc

epti

ng c

ontr

ibut

ions

from

indi

vidu

als

and

enti

ties

to b

e us

ed fo

r el

ecti

on-r

elat

ed a

ctiv

itie

s or

ele

ctio

n eq

uipm

ent.

(SB

284

)R

equi

re th

ose

requ

esti

ng a

n ab

sent

ee b

allo

t to

pres

ent i

dent

ifica

tion

to th

eir

loca

l cle

rk o

r at

tach

a c

opy

of th

eir

ID to

thei

r ap

plic

atio

n. R

equi

re c

lerk

s to

issu

e a

prov

isio

nal a

bsen

tee

ballo

t to

thos

e w

ho fa

il to

sho

w I

D. (

SB 2

85)

Proh

ibit

vot

ers

from

usi

ng a

dro

p bo

x af

ter

5 p.

m. t

he d

ay b

efor

e E

lect

ion

Day

. (SB

286

)Pr

ohib

it c

lerk

s fr

om p

rovi

ding

pre

paid

pos

tage

for

abse

ntee

bal

lot r

etur

n en

velo

pes

and

proh

ibit

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

tefr

om p

rovi

ding

fund

ing

for

prep

aid

post

age.

(SB

287

)R

equi

re s

tate

wid

e el

ecti

on a

udit

s co

nduc

ted

in a

pre

cinc

t to

be c

arri

ed o

ut b

y m

embe

rs o

f the

two

maj

or p

olit

ical

part

ies

and

allo

w p

olit

ical

par

ties

to d

esig

nate

obs

erve

rs to

mon

itor

the

audi

t and

req

uire

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

te to

prov

ide

live

vide

o st

ream

ing

of a

n au

dit.

(SB

288

)R

equi

re fe

dera

l fun

ds fo

r el

ecti

on-r

elat

ed p

urpo

ses

to o

nly

be s

pent

upo

n ap

prop

riat

ion

in a

bud

get a

ct a

nd r

equi

re a

nyfu

nds

that

are

n't a

ppro

pria

ted

wit

hin

a bu

dget

act

wit

hin

90 d

ays

to b

e re

turn

ed to

the

fede

ral g

over

nmen

t. (S

B 2

89)

Req

uire

ele

ctio

n ch

alle

nger

s to

wea

r an

iden

tific

atio

n ba

dge.

(SB

290

)A

men

d th

e cr

imin

al c

ode

to e

xpan

d el

ecti

on-r

elat

ed fe

loni

es. (

SB 2

91)

Req

uire

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

te to

est

ablis

h tr

aini

ng fo

r el

ecti

on c

halle

nger

s. R

equi

re c

halle

nger

s to

be

asso

ciat

ed w

ith

apo

litic

al p

arty

, as

oppo

sed

to g

roup

s ad

voca

ting

for

a ba

llot p

ropo

siti

on, a

nd m

anda

te th

ey ta

ke tr

aini

ng a

t lea

st o

nce

ever

y th

ree

year

s. P

arti

es w

ould

nee

d to

off

er th

is tr

aini

ng a

t lea

st th

ree

days

bef

ore

an e

lect

ion.

(SB

292

)R

epea

l a p

orti

on o

f cri

min

al la

w r

elat

ed to

ele

ctio

n ch

alle

nger

s ap

poin

ted

by e

ntit

ies

that

are

not

pol

itic

al p

arti

es. S

B29

2 bi

ll w

ould

onl

y al

low

pol

itic

al p

arti

es to

pro

vide

cha

lleng

ers.

(SB

293

)R

equi

re th

e lo

cal b

oard

of e

lect

ion

com

mis

sion

ers

to s

triv

e to

app

oint

the

sam

e nu

mbe

r of

Dem

ocra

tic

and

Rep

ublic

anel

ecti

on in

spec

tors

for

ever

y el

ecti

on p

reci

nct.

This

can

be

a ch

alle

nge

in a

reas

that

hav

e su

bsta

ntia

lly m

ore

Rep

ublic

an

9/9/

21, 1

1:08

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

sena

tors

file

39

elec

tion

refo

rm b

ills: W

hat's

in th

em

http

s://w

ww.

freep

.com

/sto

ry/n

ews/

polit

ics/

elec

tions

/202

1/03

/24/

mic

higa

n-se

nate

-gop

-ele

ctio

n-re

form

-law

s/69

6331

4002

/4/

8

or D

emoc

rati

c vo

ters

— c

hief

ly D

etro

it. I

f the

boa

rd c

anno

t app

oint

an

esse

ntia

lly e

qual

num

ber

of in

spec

tors

bas

ed o

nth

e pa

rty,

the

loca

l cle

rk w

ould

nee

d to

sen

d a

repo

rt to

the

stat

e w

ithi

n 10

day

s of

the

elec

tion

exp

lain

ing

wha

t was

done

to s

earc

h fo

r in

spec

tors

. (SB

294

)R

equi

re h

ourl

y ch

ecks

by

prec

inct

off

icia

ls to

ens

ure

that

dur

ing

the

ballo

t cou

ntin

g pr

oces

s, th

e nu

mbe

r of

bal

lots

issu

ed a

t a p

reci

nct m

atch

es th

e nu

mbe

r of

bal

lots

tabu

late

d at

a p

reci

nct.

Whi

le th

is la

w is

inte

nded

to p

reve

nt o

ut-o

f-ba

lanc

e pr

ecin

cts,

it s

eem

ingl

y do

esn’

t acc

ount

for

som

eone

rec

eivi

ng a

n ab

sent

ee b

allo

t but

not

ult

imat

ely

cast

ing

it.

(SB

295

)A

bolis

h ev

ery

exis

ting

boa

rd o

f can

vass

ers

in a

cou

nty

wit

h at

leas

t 200

,000

sta

rtin

g in

202

2. I

n a

coun

ty w

ith

200,

000

to 7

50,0

00 p

eopl

e, it

wou

ld r

equi

re s

ix-m

embe

r bo

ards

. In

larg

er c

ount

ies,

it w

ould

req

uire

eig

ht-m

embe

r bo

ards

.W

hile

boa

rds

now

gen

eral

ly c

onsi

st o

f fou

r pe

ople

, kee

ping

boa

rds

at a

n ev

en n

umbe

r w

ould

sti

ll al

low

for

the

chan

ceth

at c

erti

ficat

ion

vote

s en

d in

a ti

e. (S

B 2

96)

Req

uire

at l

east

one

Rep

ublic

an a

nd D

emoc

rat b

e pr

esen

t at a

ll ti

mes

dur

ing

an e

lect

ion

canv

ass.

Req

uire

boa

rdap

prov

al fo

r th

e cl

erk

to h

ire

any

asso

ciat

e w

ho w

ould

hel

p w

ith

the

canv

ass.

(SB

297

)E

xten

d th

e am

ount

of t

ime

for

an e

lect

ion

canv

ass

to b

e ce

rtifi

ed fr

om 1

4 da

ys a

fter

an

elec

tion

to 2

1 da

ys. (

SB 2

98)

Req

uire

ele

ctio

n in

spec

tors

to d

eliv

er th

e st

atem

ent o

f ele

ctio

n re

turn

s an

d a

vote

tally

she

et in

a s

eale

d en

velo

pe to

the

loca

l cle

rk b

y no

on th

e da

y af

ter

the

elec

tion

. (SB

299

)R

equi

re h

oldi

ng o

n-si

te e

arly

vot

ing

from

8 a

.m. t

o 5

p.m

. on

the

seco

nd S

atur

day

befo

re a

ny e

lect

ion.

Cle

rks

wou

ldne

ed to

pos

t whe

re a

nd w

hen

earl

y vo

ting

sit

es w

ould

be

open

. It w

ould

be

a fe

lony

to r

evea

l res

ults

from

an

earl

y vo

ting

peri

od u

ntil

afte

r po

lls c

lose

d on

Ele

ctio

n D

ay. (

SB 3

00)

Cre

ate

crim

inal

vio

lati

ons

for

tam

peri

ng w

ith

ballo

ts c

ast e

arly

or

wit

h re

veal

ing

the

resu

lts

from

ear

ly v

otin

g. (S

B 3

01)

Req

uire

vot

er r

egis

trat

ion

appl

icat

ions

incl

ude

a pr

ovis

ion

whe

re a

pplic

ants

att

est t

hat t

hey

do n

ot c

laim

vot

ing

resi

denc

e or

hav

e th

e ri

ght t

o vo

te in

ano

ther

sta

te. I

t’s u

ncle

ar w

heth

er th

is w

ould

ent

ail w

heth

er a

per

son

is r

egis

tere

dto

vot

e in

ano

ther

sta

te, e

ven

if th

at p

erso

n m

oved

aw

ay fr

om th

at s

tate

to M

ichi

gan.

(SB

302

)R

amp

up th

e st

ate’

s vo

ter

iden

tific

atio

n re

quir

emen

ts. R

ight

now

, vot

ers

who

do

not h

ave

phot

o id

enti

ficat

ion

can

sign

an a

ffid

avit

att

esti

ng to

thei

r id

enti

ty. T

his

bill

wou

ld in

stea

d m

anda

te th

at th

ey b

e is

sued

pro

visi

onal

bal

lots

, sub

ject

toa

sepa

rate

pro

cess

of c

ount

ing

and

veri

ficat

ion.

(SB

303

)

9/9/

21, 1

1:08

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

sena

tors

file

39

elec

tion

refo

rm b

ills: W

hat's

in th

em

http

s://w

ww.

freep

.com

/sto

ry/n

ews/

polit

ics/

elec

tions

/202

1/03

/24/

mic

higa

n-se

nate

-gop

-ele

ctio

n-re

form

-law

s/69

6331

4002

/5/

8

Out

line

how

vot

ers

who

wan

t the

ir p

rovi

sion

al b

allo

ts to

cou

nt w

ould

ver

ify th

eir

iden

tity

. The

bill

wou

ld r

equi

re th

ese

vote

rs to

pro

ve th

eir

iden

tity

wit

hin

six

days

of t

he e

lect

ion

— if

they

pre

sent

a g

over

nmen

t-is

sued

ID

that

doe

s no

tin

clud

e an

add

ress

, vot

ers

wou

ld a

lso

need

to p

rese

nt a

doc

umen

t suc

h as

a u

tilit

y bi

ll or

ban

k st

atem

ent v

erify

ing

thei

rad

dres

s. (S

B 3

04)

Ban

ele

cted

off

icia

ls fr

om in

clud

ing

thei

r na

mes

on

publ

icly

fund

ed m

ater

ials

that

hav

e an

ythi

ng to

do

wit

h el

ecti

ons.

Off

icia

ls c

ould

pos

t the

nam

es o

f off

ices

and

con

tact

info

rmat

ion,

but

not

the

nam

e of

the

elec

tion

off

icia

l. In

theo

ry,

this

wou

ld p

rohi

bit t

he s

ecre

tary

of s

tate

or

coun

ty c

lerk

s fr

om u

sing

taxp

ayer

dol

lars

to c

ampa

ign

whi

le s

prea

ding

elec

tion

info

rmat

ion.

In

prac

tice

, the

mea

sure

wou

ld li

kely

mak

e it

a m

isde

mea

nor

for

an e

lect

ed o

ffic

ial t

o po

st a

new

sre

leas

e w

ith

a qu

ote

on s

ocia

l med

ia. (

SB 3

05)

Req

uire

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

te to

sub

mit

a r

epor

t to

the

Legi

slat

ure

and

publ

icly

pos

t wit

hin

45 d

ays

of a

n el

ecti

on th

ena

mes

of a

ll lo

cal c

lerk

s w

ho h

ave

not c

ondu

cted

req

uire

d tr

aini

ng. (

SB 3

06)

Req

uire

the

full

text

of a

bal

lot p

ropo

sal b

e in

clud

ed o

n ab

sent

ee b

allo

ts a

nd b

allo

ts c

ast i

n pe

rson

. (SB

307

)M

anda

te th

e se

cret

ary

of s

tate

cre

ate

a si

gnat

ure

veri

ficat

ion

proc

ess

and

that

loca

l cle

rks

be tr

aine

d on

that

pro

cess

.Th

is c

omes

in r

espo

nse

to m

isin

form

atio

n ab

out s

igna

ture

s on

abs

ente

e ba

llot a

pplic

atio

ns a

nd a

bsen

tee

ballo

ts. (

SB30

8)O

utlin

e ru

les

and

regu

lati

ons

for

poll

wat

cher

s an

d po

ll ch

alle

nger

s. I

t exp

lain

s th

e du

ties

of b

oth

posi

tion

s, w

here

they

are

allo

wed

to s

tand

on

Ele

ctio

n D

ay, w

hat t

hey

are

allo

wed

to c

halle

nge

and

how

to r

esol

ve d

ispu

tes.

Rep

ublic

ans

argu

ed c

halle

nger

s an

d w

atch

ers

at T

CF

Cen

ter

in D

etro

it w

ere

prev

ente

d fr

om m

onit

orin

g el

ecti

on w

orke

rs la

st fa

ll,bu

t the

cit

y an

d D

emoc

rats

arg

ued

thes

e ch

alle

nger

s di

d no

t und

erst

and

thei

r ro

les

and

igno

red

CO

VID

-19

soci

aldi

stan

cing

gui

delin

es. (

SB 3

09)

Proh

ibit

the

secr

etar

y of

sta

te fr

om e

ithe

r m

ailin

g ab

sent

ee b

allo

t app

licat

ions

or

post

ing

thes

e ap

plic

atio

ns o

n a

web

site

. The

sec

reta

ry c

ould

onl

y m

ail a

n ap

plic

atio

n to

som

eone

who

req

uest

ed th

at a

pplic

atio

n. I

t was

not

imm

edia

tely

cle

ar w

heth

er a

ny o

ther

ent

ity

— s

uch

as lo

cal c

lerk

s or

pol

itic

al p

arti

es —

wou

ld b

e ba

nned

from

mai

ling

out u

nsol

icit

ed a

pplic

atio

ns. R

epub

lican

s ro

utin

ely

argu

e m

ailin

g ou

t app

licat

ions

to v

oter

s w

ho d

id n

ot r

eque

st th

emm

ay in

crea

se th

e ch

ance

s of

vot

er fr

aud.

Vot

er fr

aud

is e

xcep

tion

ally

rar

e, a

nd th

ere

is n

o ev

iden

ce th

at m

ass

mai

lings

of a

pplic

atio

ns d

rast

ical

ly in

crea

ses

frau

d. (S

B 3

10)

9/9/

21, 1

1:08

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

sena

tors

file

39

elec

tion

refo

rm b

ills: W

hat's

in th

em

http

s://w

ww.

freep

.com

/sto

ry/n

ews/

polit

ics/

elec

tions

/202

1/03

/24/

mic

higa

n-se

nate

-gop

-ele

ctio

n-re

form

-law

s/69

6331

4002

/6/

8

Allo

w a

ctiv

e du

ty s

ervi

ce m

embe

rs w

ho a

re d

eplo

yed

at th

e ti

me

of a

n el

ecti

on to

cas

t a b

allo

t ele

ctro

nica

lly, a

s lo

ng a

ssi

gnat

ure

veri

ficat

ion

mea

sure

s ar

e cr

eate

d an

d us

ed. (

SB 3

11)

The

prop

osed

ref

orm

s co

me

mon

ths

afte

r su

ppor

ters

of f

orm

er P

resi

dent

Don

ald

Trum

p re

peat

edly

and

fals

ely

stat

ed th

ere

was

ram

pant

ele

ctio

n m

isco

nduc

t in

Mic

higa

n.

At n

o po

int d

id th

e Tr

ump

cam

paig

n or

any

of h

is s

uppo

rter

s pr

ovid

e an

y cr

edib

le e

vide

nce

of w

ides

prea

d el

ecti

on fr

aud

orm

isco

nduc

t. In

stea

d, th

ey r

elie

d on

mis

lead

ing

repo

rts,

eye

wit

ness

acc

ount

s fr

om u

ntra

ined

ele

ctio

n m

onit

ors

and

cons

pira

cy th

eori

es fr

om a

ttor

neys

now

faci

ng b

illio

n-do

llar

defa

mat

ion

law

suit

s. P

olls

con

sist

entl

y fin

d th

at a

maj

orit

y of

Rep

ublic

an v

oter

s in

the

coun

try

ques

tion

the

legi

tim

acy

of th

e el

ecti

on r

esul

ts.

"No

one

shou

ld b

e fo

oled

: Thi

s is

not

hing

mor

e th

an a

n ex

tens

ion

of li

es a

nd d

ecei

t abo

ut th

e la

st e

lect

ion.

We

cann

ot a

ndsh

ould

not

mak

e po

licy

base

d on

the

Big

Lie

," s

aid

Sena

te M

inor

ity

Lead

er J

im A

nani

ch, D

-Flin

t.

"Our

ele

ctio

ns a

re fa

ir a

nd s

afe

and

that

has

bee

n th

e ca

se u

nder

Rep

ublic

an a

dmin

istr

atio

ns a

nd D

emoc

rati

cad

min

istr

atio

ns. T

he fa

ct th

at R

epub

lican

s di

dn’t

win

as

man

y ra

ces

as th

ey w

ante

d to

doe

s no

t jus

tify

thei

r at

tem

pt to

sile

nce

vote

rs. I

n th

e en

d, w

e kn

ow th

ese

desp

icab

le e

ffor

ts to

kee

p M

ichi

gand

ers

from

the

polls

will

not

suc

ceed

."

Mor

e:A

ntri

m C

ount

y ha

nd ta

lly a

ffir

ms

cert

ified

ele

ctio

n re

sult

s

Mor

e:Fi

ery

Giu

liani

tells

Mic

higa

n la

wm

aker

s el

ecti

on s

tole

n, o

ffer

s no

cre

dibl

e ev

iden

ce

Secr

etar

y of

Sta

te J

ocel

yn B

enso

n ca

lled

the

Rep

ublic

an p

acka

ge a

"re

preh

ensi

ble

rollb

ack

of th

e ri

ght t

o vo

te"

that

com

esaf

ter

Mic

higa

n vo

ters

pas

sed

a co

nsti

tuti

onal

am

endm

ent i

n 20

18 to

exp

and

voti

ng a

cces

s in

the

stat

e by

allo

win

g vo

ters

tovo

te a

bsen

tee

for

any

reas

on. "

Man

y of

the

bills

in th

is p

acka

ge w

ill m

ake

it h

arde

r fo

r ci

tize

ns to

vot

e. R

athe

r th

anin

trod

ucin

g bi

lls b

ased

on

disp

rove

n lie

s an

d co

pied

from

oth

er s

tate

s, la

wm

aker

s sh

ould

be

codi

fyin

g w

hat w

orke

d in

2020

," s

he s

aid.

Chr

is S

wop

e, w

ho s

erve

s as

pre

side

nt o

f the

Mic

higa

n A

ssoc

iati

on o

f Mun

icip

al C

lerk

s an

d is

Lan

sing

's c

lerk

, sai

d th

epa

ckag

e "c

onta

ins

som

e of

the

mos

t egr

egio

us v

oter

sup

pres

sion

idea

s M

ichi

gan

has

seen

." H

e sa

id la

wm

aker

s sh

ould

"foc

us o

n ex

pand

ing

ballo

t acc

ess,

not

att

empt

s to

dis

enfr

anch

ise

cert

ain

vote

rs."

9/9/

21, 1

1:08

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

sena

tors

file

39

elec

tion

refo

rm b

ills: W

hat's

in th

em

http

s://w

ww.

freep

.com

/sto

ry/n

ews/

polit

ics/

elec

tions

/202

1/03

/24/

mic

higa

n-se

nate

-gop

-ele

ctio

n-re

form

-law

s/69

6331

4002

/7/

8

Vot

ing

righ

ts a

dvoc

ates

als

o sp

oke

out a

gain

st th

e m

easu

res.

Shar

on D

olen

te, a

sen

ior

advi

ser

for

the

Prom

ote

the

Vot

e C

oalit

ion,

sai

d th

at "

reco

rd tu

rnou

t isn

't a

reas

on to

mak

e it

hard

er fo

r so

me

or im

poss

ible

for

othe

rs to

vot

e. M

ichi

gan

need

s to

look

forw

ard

and

cont

inue

cre

atin

g a

voti

ng s

yste

mth

at w

orks

for

all o

f us.

"

Chr

isti

na S

chlit

t, pr

esid

ent o

f the

Lea

gue

of W

omen

Vot

ers

of M

ichi

gan,

sai

d th

e bi

lls "

are

anti

thet

ical

to fa

ir e

lect

ions

and

viol

ate

the

clea

r w

ill o

f Mic

higa

n vo

ters

who

par

tici

pate

d in

rec

ord

num

bers

in 2

020.

"

And

Nan

cy W

ang,

exe

cuti

ve d

irec

tor

of V

oter

s N

ot P

olit

icia

ns, t

he g

roup

beh

ind

a co

nsti

tuti

onal

am

endm

ent t

hat h

ascr

eate

d M

ichi

gan'

s ci

tize

ns r

edis

tric

ting

com

mis

sion

, sai

d th

at "

Sena

te R

epub

lican

s jo

ined

the

coor

dina

ted,

nat

iona

l eff

ort

to m

ake

it h

arde

r fo

r vo

ters

to e

xerc

ise

our

righ

t to

vote

." S

he p

ledg

ed to

mob

ilize

aga

inst

eff

orts

to "

supp

ress

the

vote

inM

ichi

gan.

"

Mic

higa

n la

wm

aker

s ha

ve a

lrea

dy in

trod

uced

mea

sure

s to

add

ress

som

e of

the

issu

es th

at a

rose

from

the

gene

ral e

lect

ion.

One

bill

wou

ld r

equi

re m

ore

trai

ning

for

anyo

ne w

ho w

ante

d to

ser

ve a

s a

poll

mon

itor

or

wat

cher

. Ano

ther

wou

ld a

llow

coun

ty c

lerk

s to

rem

ove

dead

peo

ple

from

vot

ing

rolls

— a

ltho

ugh

no d

ead

peop

le v

oted

.

A p

air

of b

ills

intr

oduc

ed b

y G

OP

law

mak

ers

that

rec

entl

y pa

ssed

the

Hou

se w

ould

req

uire

vot

ers

wit

h un

know

n bi

rth

date

san

d th

ose

who

hav

en't

vote

d in

a lo

ng ti

me

to ta

ke s

teps

to e

nsur

e th

eir

regi

stra

tion

isn'

t can

cele

d.

Rep

. Mat

t Hal

l, R

-Em

met

t Tow

nshi

p, in

trod

uced

legi

slat

ion

requ

irin

g vo

ters

ass

igne

d a

plac

ehol

der

birt

h da

te to

ver

ifyth

eir

actu

al b

irth

dat

e. H

e sa

id it

had

not

hing

to d

o w

ith

alle

gati

ons

of m

isco

nduc

t by

Trum

p su

ppor

ters

dur

ing

the

Nov

embe

r el

ecti

on. I

nste

ad, h

e sa

id th

at it

was

cra

fted

to im

plem

ent r

ecom

men

dati

ons

put f

orw

ard

in a

Dec

embe

r 20

19re

port

by

the

Off

ice

of th

e A

udit

or G

ener

al fo

r im

prov

ing

vote

r lis

t mai

nten

ance

in M

ichi

gan.

Mor

e:M

ichi

gan

Sena

te G

OP

lead

er S

hirk

ey fa

lsel

y cl

aim

s de

ad p

eopl

e vo

ted

But

the

prop

osal

s of

fere

d by

Rep

ublic

ans

in th

e Se

nate

go

far

beyo

nd a

ny p

robl

ems

seen

in th

e la

st g

ener

al e

lect

ion.

Inst

ead,

Dem

ocra

ts a

nd v

otin

g ri

ghts

adv

ocat

es a

rgue

the

mea

sure

s ar

e th

e la

test

eff

orts

to c

urb

voti

ng b

y pe

ople

who

tend

to o

ppos

e G

OP

cand

idat

es.

9/9/

21, 1

1:08

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

sena

tors

file

39

elec

tion

refo

rm b

ills: W

hat's

in th

em

http

s://w

ww.

freep

.com

/sto

ry/n

ews/

polit

ics/

elec

tions

/202

1/03

/24/

mic

higa

n-se

nate

-gop

-ele

ctio

n-re

form

-law

s/69

6331

4002

/8/

8

Mor

e:M

ichi

gan

elec

tion

bill

s ta

ke a

im a

t dor

man

t vot

ers,

thos

e w

ith

unkn

own

birt

hdat

es

Mor

e:Si

dney

Pow

ell t

eam

dou

bles

dow

n on

deb

unke

d el

ecti

on c

laim

s in

att

empt

to a

void

san

ctio

ns

Stat

e R

epub

lican

law

mak

ers

arou

nd th

e co

untr

y ha

ve m

oved

forw

ard

wit

h m

easu

res

that

wou

ld r

estr

ict v

otin

gac

cess

see

min

gly

in r

espo

nse

to b

asel

ess

clai

ms

of a

sto

len

elec

tion

.

Her

itag

e A

ctio

n, a

con

serv

ativ

e gr

oup

tied

to th

e ri

ght-

lean

ing

Her

itag

e Fo

unda

tion

, rec

entl

y an

noun

ced

it p

lans

to s

pend

$10

mill

ion

to p

ush

elec

tion

ref

orm

s in

sev

eral

bat

tleg

roun

d st

ates

, inc

ludi

ng M

ichi

gan.

And

a g

roup

cal

led

Res

cue

Mic

higa

n C

oalit

ion

has

rele

ased

its

own

draf

t pla

n fo

r re

form

ing

Mic

higa

n's

elec

tion

law

that

wou

ld s

igni

fican

tly

roll

back

voti

ng a

cces

s in

Mic

higa

n. T

he g

roup

's le

ader

ship

incl

udes

Sha

ne T

rejo

, a r

epor

ter

for

the

righ

t-w

ing

web

site

Big

Lea

gue

Polit

ics

who

ped

dled

mis

info

rmat

ion

abou

t ele

ctio

n tr

aini

ng in

Det

roit

.

Ther

e ar

e m

any

legi

slat

ive

hurd

les

the

Rep

ublic

an m

easu

res

intr

oduc

ed W

edne

sday

mus

t sti

ll cl

ear

befo

re th

ey c

ould

take

effe

ct. T

he H

ouse

and

Sen

ate

need

to a

gree

on

and

appr

ove

any

bills

bef

ore

Gov

. Gre

tche

n W

hitm

er w

ould

hav

e th

e ch

ance

to s

ign

them

into

law

.

Con

tact

Dav

e B

ouch

er: d

bouc

her@

free

pres

s.co

m o

r 31

3-93

8-45

91. F

ollo

w h

im o

n Tw

itte

r @

Dav

e_B

ouch

er1.

EXHIBIT 3

9/9/

21, 1

1:09

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

chai

r pla

ns to

go

arou

nd W

hitm

er fo

r vot

ing

law

cha

nges

http

s://w

ww.

detro

itnew

s.co

m/s

tory

/new

s/po

litic

s/20

21/0

3/26

/mic

higa

n-go

p-ch

airm

an-p

lans

-go-

arou

nd-w

hitm

er-v

otin

g-la

w-c

hang

es/7

0104

1700

2/1/

3

PO

LIT

ICS

Mic

hig

an

GO

P le

ad

er

rev

ea

ls p

lan

s to

go

aro

un

dW

hit

me

r fo

r v

oti

ng

law

ov

erh

au

lC

raig

Ma

ug

er

The

Det

roit

New

sPu

blis

hed

9:54

a.m

. ET

Mar

. 26,

202

1U

pdat

ed 4

:37

p.m

. ET

Mar

. 26,

202

1

Lans

ing

— M

ichi

gan

Rep

ublic

ans

are

craf

ting

pla

ns to

wor

k ar

ound

Dem

ocra

tic

Gov

. Gre

tche

n W

hitm

er to

mak

e ch

ange

sto

the

batt

legr

ound

sta

te's

vot

ing

law

s af

ter

loss

es in

the

2020

ele

ctio

n.

Ron

Wei

ser,

cha

irm

an o

f the

Mic

higa

n G

OP,

told

the

Nor

th O

akla

nd R

epub

lican

Clu

b Th

ursd

ay n

ight

that

the

part

y w

ants

to b

lend

toge

ther

bill

s pr

opos

ed in

the

Hou

se a

nd S

enat

e fo

r a

peti

tion

init

iati

ve.

If R

epub

lican

s ga

ther

ed e

noug

h si

gnat

ures

— m

ore

than

340

,000

wou

ld b

e ne

eded

— th

e G

OP-

cont

rolle

d Le

gisl

atur

e co

uld

appr

ove

the

prop

osal

into

law

wit

hout

Whi

tmer

bei

ng a

ble

to v

eto

it.

Sena

te R

epub

lican

s un

veile

d 39

bill

s W

edne

sday

to r

equi

re a

pplic

ants

for

abse

ntee

bal

lots

to p

rese

nt a

cop

y of

iden

tific

atio

n, o

verh

aul l

arge

cou

ntie

s' c

anva

ssin

g bo

ards

and

bar

Dem

ocra

tic

Secr

etar

y of

Sta

te J

ocel

yn B

enso

n fr

omse

ndin

g ab

sent

ee b

allo

t app

licat

ions

to v

oter

s un

less

they

spe

cific

ally

req

uest

the

appl

icat

ions

.

"If t

hat l

egis

lati

on is

not

pas

sed

by o

ur L

egis

latu

re, w

hich

I a

m s

ure

it w

ill b

e, b

ut if

it's

not

sig

ned

by th

e go

vern

or, t

hen

we

have

oth

er p

lans

to m

ake

sure

that

it b

ecom

es la

w b

efor

e 20

22,"

Wei

ser

said

, acc

ordi

ng to

a v

ideo

pos

ted

on s

ocia

l med

ia.

"Tha

t pla

n in

clud

es ta

king

that

legi

slat

ion

and

gett

ing

the

sign

atur

es n

eces

sary

for

a le

gisl

ativ

e in

itia

tive

so

it c

an b

ecom

ela

w w

itho

ut G

retc

hen

Whi

tmer

's s

igna

ture

," W

eise

r ad

ded.

9/9/

21, 1

1:09

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

chai

r pla

ns to

go

arou

nd W

hitm

er fo

r vot

ing

law

cha

nges

http

s://w

ww.

detro

itnew

s.co

m/s

tory

/new

s/po

litic

s/20

21/0

3/26

/mic

higa

n-go

p-ch

airm

an-p

lans

-go-

arou

nd-w

hitm

er-v

otin

g-la

w-c

hang

es/7

0104

1700

2/2/

3

In s

tate

s ac

ross

the

coun

try

this

yea

r, R

epub

lican

s ha

ve a

dvan

ced

chan

ges

to v

otin

g la

ws

afte

r fo

rmer

Pre

side

nt D

onal

dTr

ump

lost

to D

emoc

rat J

oe B

iden

on

Nov

. 3 a

nd m

ade

unpr

oven

cla

ims

of v

oter

frau

d.

Dem

ocra

ts a

rgue

that

the

nati

onal

pus

h is

a c

onti

nuat

ion

of T

rum

p's

effo

rt to

ove

rtur

n th

e re

sult

s an

d w

ould

res

tric

t acc

ess

to b

allo

ts in

futu

re e

lect

ions

to b

enef

it th

e G

OP'

s ch

ance

s of

win

ning

. On

Thur

sday

, Wei

ser

said

Mic

higa

n R

epub

lican

Par

tydi

stri

ct c

hair

s re

ceiv

ed a

bri

efin

g on

the

Sena

te le

gisl

atio

n fr

om S

en. A

ric

Nes

bitt

, R-L

awto

n.

"Tho

se tw

o pi

eces

of l

egis

lati

on, m

elde

d to

geth

er, a

re g

oing

to c

reat

e an

opp

ortu

nity

for

us to

hav

e a

fair

ele

ctio

n in

202

2,"

Wei

ser

said

, ref

erri

ng to

pro

posa

ls in

the

Hou

se a

nd S

enat

e.

The

Sena

te b

ills

wou

ld p

lace

res

tric

tion

s on

bal

lot d

rop

boxe

s an

d w

ould

bar

loca

l gov

ernm

ents

from

pro

vidi

ng p

repa

idpo

stag

e fo

r ab

sent

ee b

allo

t ret

urn

enve

lope

s as

som

e di

d to

enc

oura

ge p

arti

cipa

tion

last

yea

r. A

noth

er b

ill w

ould

req

uire

vote

rs w

itho

ut p

hoto

iden

tific

atio

n to

vot

e th

roug

h a

prov

isio

nal b

allo

t.

Ear

lier

this

wee

k, S

enat

e M

inor

ity

Lead

er J

im A

nani

ch, D

-Flin

t, sa

id M

ichi

gan'

s el

ecti

ons

are

alre

ady

fair

and

hav

e be

enun

der

both

Rep

ublic

an a

nd D

emoc

rati

c ad

min

istr

atio

ns.

"The

fact

that

Rep

ublic

ans

didn

’t w

in a

s m

any

race

s as

they

wan

ted

to d

oes

not j

usti

fy th

eir

atte

mpt

to s

ilenc

e vo

ters

,"A

nani

ch s

aid.

Dur

ing

a Th

ursd

ay m

orni

ng a

ppea

ranc

e at

the

Mic

higa

n C

hron

icle

's P

anca

kes

and

Polit

ics

even

t, W

hitm

er s

aid

she

oppo

sed

the

Rep

ublic

an e

lect

ion

prop

osal

s.

"I h

ave

a ve

to p

en, a

nd I

am

rea

dy to

use

that

for

any

bill

that

is lo

okin

g to

mak

e it

har

der

for

peop

le in

our

sta

te to

vot

e,"

the

gove

rnor

sai

d.

On

Dec

. 17,

a b

allo

t com

mit

tee

calle

d Se

cure

MI

Vot

e w

as fo

rmed

in M

ichi

gan,

acc

ordi

ng to

cam

paig

n fin

ance

dis

clos

ures

.Th

e gr

oup'

s tr

easu

rer

is P

aul C

orde

s, W

eise

r's c

hief

of s

taff

.

Lavo

ra B

arne

s, c

hair

wom

an o

f the

Mic

higa

n D

emoc

rati

c Pa

rty,

sai

d th

at 2

.7 m

illio

n M

ichi

gan

resi

dent

s vo

ted

in 2

018

for

"the

mos

t com

preh

ensi

ve r

efor

m to

our

ele

ctio

n sy

stem

in th

e st

ate'

s hi

stor

y."

9/9/

21, 1

1:09

AM

Mic

higa

n G

OP

chai

r pla

ns to

go

arou

nd W

hitm

er fo

r vot

ing

law

cha

nges

http

s://w

ww.

detro

itnew

s.co

m/s

tory

/new

s/po

litic

s/20

21/0

3/26

/mic

higa

n-go

p-ch

airm

an-p

lans

-go-

arou

nd-w

hitm

er-v

otin

g-la

w-c

hang

es/7

0104

1700

2/3/

3

Am

ong

othe

r ch

ange

s, th

at c

onst

itut

iona

l am

endm

ent a

llow

ed fo

r no

-rea

son

abse

ntee

vot

ing.

It p

asse

d w

ith

67%

sup

port

.

Rep

ublic

ans

wou

ldn'

t be

able

to u

nila

tera

lly c

hang

e th

e st

ate

Con

stit

utio

n th

roug

h an

init

iati

ve p

etit

ion.

"The

vot

ers

have

spo

ken

on e

lect

ion

refo

rm,"

Bar

nes

said

. "Th

e M

IGO

P ha

s de

cide

d to

igno

re th

e w

ill o

f the

vot

ers

wit

h th

isri

dicu

lous

pac

kage

of b

ills

desi

gned

to m

ake

it h

arde

r to

vot

e, e

spec

ially

for

Bla

ck a

nd B

row

n ci

tize

ns.

"Thi

s is

how

the

Mic

higa

n R

epub

lican

s do

bus

ines

s. F

irst

, the

y lo

se. T

hen

they

lie.

And

then

they

find

way

s to

sup

pres

s th

evo

te, b

ecau

se e

ven

they

kno

w th

at w

hen

peop

le v

ote,

Dem

ocra

ts w

in."

The

Mic

higa

n G

OP

didn

't im

med

iate

ly r

etur

n a

requ

est F

rida

y m

orni

ng fo

r co

mm

ent.

But

dur

ing

Thur

sday

's p

rese

ntat

ion,

Wei

ser

said

the

part

y pl

ans

to h

ave

a pr

ogra

m to

bac

k it

s up

com

ing

init

iati

ve, i

n w

hich

the

stat

e or

gani

zati

on w

ill p

ay lo

cal c

ount

y pa

rtie

s to

gat

her

sign

atur

es. T

he c

ount

y pa

rtie

s w

ill th

en u

se th

e m

oney

they

rece

ive

to s

uppo

rt lo

cal c

andi

date

s, th

e ch

airm

an s

aid.

"Hav

ing

thos

e pe

ople

be

succ

essf

ul is

so

impo

rtan

t to

the

futu

re o

f our

cou

ntry

," W

eise

r sa

id.

cmau

ger@

detr

oitn

ews.

com

EXHIBIT 4

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

1/16

Mic

hig

an’s

no

np

arti

san

, no

np

rot

new

s so

urc

e

If y

ou

car

e ab

ou

t M

ich

igan

, ple

ase

sup

po

rt o

ur

wo

rk.

TR

EN

DIN

G:

Co

ron

avir

us

Mic

hig

an |

Gov

. Gre

tch

en W

hit

mer

| M

ich

igan

K-1

2 s

cho

ols

| D

etro

it |

20

20

Mic

hig

an e

lect

ion

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ecti

on re

form

bill

s. M

any

wou

ld a

ddhu

rdle

s to

voti

ng.

DO

NA

TE

TO

DA

Y

Mic

hig

an G

over

nm

ent

Popu

lar

Topi

csAr

chiv

eAb

out

Even

tsSi

gn U

pCo

ntac

tSEARCH

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

2/16

Mic

hig

an R

epu

blic

ans

hav

e p

rop

ose

d a

39

-bill

pac

kage

of r

efo

rm b

ills

they

say

will

mak

e vo

tin

g ea

sier

an

d c

hea

tin

g h

ard

er.

Mic

hig

an c

lerk

s sa

y th

ey w

ish

th

ey’d

bee

n c

on

sult

ed b

efo

re t

he

legi

slat

ion

was

wri

tten

. (B

rid

ge

le p

ho

to)

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

3/16

Ap

ril 9

, 20

21

Jon

ath

an O

ost

ing

Mic

hig

an G

over

nm

ent

20

20

Mic

hig

an e

lect

ion

, 20

20

U.S

. pre

sid

enti

al e

lect

ion

SHA

RE

TH

IS:

Jun

e 2

3:G

OP

inve

stig

atio

n

nd

s n

o M

ich

igan

vo

te fr

aud

, dee

ms

man

y cl

aim

s ‘lu

dic

rou

s’

Jun

e 1

6:M

ich

igan

GO

P p

asse

s vo

ter

ID b

ill t

o d

eter

‘fra

ud

.’ Cri

tics

cal

l it

‘gar

bag

e’

LAN

SIN

G —

Mic

hig

an R

epu

blic

ans

say

they

wan

t to

mak

e it

“eas

ier

to v

ote

an

d h

ard

er t

o

chea

t” w

ith

a s

wee

pin

g el

ecti

on

ref

orm

pac

kage

. In

fact

, man

y o

f th

e b

ills

wo

uld

mak

e it

har

der

to

vo

te a

nd

ad

dre

ss “

frau

d”

that

exp

erts

say

is in

cred

ibly

rar

e.

Bri

dge

Mic

hig

an r

evie

wed

all

39

Sen

ate

bill

s th

at c

ou

ld b

e th

e b

asis

of a

sta

tew

ide

pet

itio

n

dri

ve t

o c

ircu

mve

nt

a lik

ely

veto

by

Dem

ocr

atic

Gov

. Gre

tch

en W

hit

mer

, in

clu

din

g m

easu

res

that

wo

uld

lim

it v

ote

r ac

cess

to

ab

sen

tee

bal

lot

dro

p b

oxes

an

d r

equ

ire

ph

oto

ID t

o v

ote

in

per

son

or

by m

ail.

Rel

ated

:

Mic

hig

an G

OP

of

cial

s, a

ctiv

ists

pu

sh fo

r 2

02

0 e

lect

ion

au

dit

Mic

hig

an G

OP

rel

axes

bal

lot

dro

p b

ox r

efo

rm. C

riti

cs s

ay p

lan

is s

till

un

fair

Act

ivis

ts w

ant

to o

ust

Mic

hig

an G

OP

dir

ecto

r fo

r sa

yin

g Tr

um

p ‘b

lew

it’ i

n 2

02

0

GO

P w

ants

to

sp

lit M

ich

igan

Ele

cto

ral C

olle

ge v

ote

s. T

hat

wo

uld

hel

p t

he

GO

P.

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

4/16

Mic

hig

an C

EO

s to

GO

P: D

on’

t d

isen

fran

chis

e vo

ters

Pre

ssu

re o

n M

ich

igan

bu

sin

esse

s to

tak

e a

po

siti

on

on

GO

P v

oti

ng

bill

s

Mic

hig

an G

OP

vo

tin

g p

lan

has

mu

ch in

co

mm

on

wit

h G

eorg

ia la

w. H

ow

th

ey c

om

par

e

Ho

w R

epu

blic

ans

pla

n t

o t

igh

ten

Mic

hig

an v

oti

ng

law

s, e

vad

e W

hit

mer

vet

o

Mic

hig

an G

OP

unv

eils

ele

ctio

n ‘r

efo

rms.’

Mo

st w

ou

ld m

ake

voti

ng

har

der

.

We

spo

ke w

ith

att

orn

eys,

ele

ctio

n o

fci

als,

vo

tin

g ri

ghts

ad

voca

tes

and

oth

er e

xper

ts t

o

ensu

re w

e u

nd

erst

oo

d t

he

bill

s an

d h

ow

th

ey c

ou

ld im

pac

t M

ich

igan

vo

ters

.

Th

at’s

so

met

hin

g Se

nat

e R

epu

blic

ans

did

no

t ap

pea

r to

do

, acc

ord

ing

to G

OP

an

d D

emo

crat

ic

cler

ks, w

ho

ob

ject

to

so

me

of t

he

pro

visi

on

s an

d q

ues

tio

n w

het

her

th

e b

ills

are

mo

tiva

ted

by

fals

e fr

aud

cla

ims

fro

m fo

rmer

Pre

sid

ent

Do

nal

d T

rum

p a

nd

his

su

pp

ort

ers.

“Th

e st

and

ard

of p

roo

f nee

ds

to b

e p

rett

y h

igh

if y

ou

're

goin

g to

mak

e lif

e w

ors

e fo

r a

vote

r,”

said

Ott

awa

Co

un

ty C

lerk

Ju

stin

Ro

ebu

ck, a

Rep

ub

lican

wh

o c

o-c

hai

rs t

he

Mic

hig

an

Ass

oci

atio

n o

f Co

un

ty C

lerk

s’ le

gisl

ativ

e co

mm

itte

e.

Dem

ocr

atic

Pre

sid

ent

Joe

Bid

en b

eat

Tru

mp

by

15

4,1

88

vo

tes

in M

ich

igan

, bu

t n

ot

bef

ore

Tru

mp

had

pre

mat

ure

ly d

ecla

red

vic

tory

, fu

elin

g co

nsp

irac

y th

eori

sts

wh

o c

on

tin

ue

to a

rgu

e

the

elec

tio

n w

as s

tole

n d

esp

ite

nu

mer

ou

s st

ate

aud

its

con

rmin

g it

s va

lidit

y an

d a

ccu

racy

.

Som

e o

f th

e b

ills

mak

e se

nse

as

a w

ay t

o “

secu

re o

ur

elec

tora

l pro

cess

an

d m

ayb

e in

crea

se

con

den

ce in

so

me

elem

ents

of t

he

pro

cess

,” R

oeb

uck

ad

ded

. Bu

t th

ere

is n

o e

vid

ence

of

frau

d t

o ju

stif

y st

rict

vo

ter

ID r

equ

irem

ents

th

e p

lan

pro

po

ses,

he

said

.

Th

e le

gisl

atio

n “

mak

es it

mo

re d

ifcu

lt t

o v

ote

in a

nu

mb

er o

f way

s,” s

aid

Can

ton

To

wn

ship

Cle

rk M

ich

ael S

iegr

ist,

a D

emo

crat

. “It

mak

es it

mo

re d

ifcu

lt t

o a

dm

inis

ter

elec

tio

ns,

an

d it

real

ly s

hif

ts a

lot

of t

he

po

wer

… t

o t

he

po

litic

al p

arti

es.”

Th

e b

ills,

tak

en t

oge

ther

, wo

uld

ad

d r

estr

icti

on

s th

at w

ou

ld h

ave

a gr

eate

r o

nu

s o

n

pre

do

min

antl

y D

emo

crat

ic c

ou

nti

es, a

llow

ing

Rep

ub

lican

s to

blo

ck t

he

pla

cem

ent

of

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

5/16

abse

nte

e d

rop

box

es a

nd

set

tin

g d

ead

lines

for

vote

co

un

tin

g th

at c

ou

ld b

e h

ard

to

mee

t.

Her

e ar

e so

me

of t

he

mo

st im

po

rtan

t p

rovi

sio

ns

in t

he

Sen

ate

GO

P p

lan

, an

d h

ow

th

ey w

ou

ld

imp

act

vote

rs a

nd

ele

ctio

n a

dm

inis

trat

ion

. (N

ote

: Th

e b

ills

cou

ld b

e am

end

ed d

uri

ng

the

legi

slat

ive

pro

cess

. Co

mm

itte

e h

eari

ngs

hav

e n

ot

yet

star

ted

).

All v

oter

s wou

ld n

eed

an ID

to v

ote

in-p

erso

n or

by

mai

l

Wh

at’s

new

: Mic

hig

an g

ener

ally

req

uir

es a

n ID

to

vo

te in

per

son

, bu

t al

low

s vo

ters

wit

ho

ut

on

e to

cas

t a

bal

lot

afte

r si

gnin

g an

af

dav

it o

f id

enti

ty, u

nd

er p

enal

ty o

f per

jury

.

Th

at o

pti

on

wo

uld

en

d u

nd

er S

enat

e B

ill 3

03

, wh

ich

inst

ead

wo

uld

req

uir

e vo

ters

wit

ho

ut

ID

to c

ast

a “p

rovi

sio

nal

bal

lot”

th

at w

ou

ldn’

t b

e co

un

ted

on

Ele

ctio

n D

ay —

an

d w

ou

ld o

nly

cou

nt

if t

he

vote

r re

turn

ed t

o t

he

cler

k an

d p

rese

nte

d b

oth

a p

ho

to ID

an

d p

roo

f of r

esid

ence

,

such

as

a u

tilit

y b

ill o

r b

ank

stat

emen

t.

Sen

ate

Bill

30

4 w

ou

ld r

equ

ire

elec

tio

n s

taff

to

pro

vid

e n

oti

ce t

o p

rovi

sio

nal

bal

lot

vote

rs t

hat

they

may

qu

alif

y fo

r a

free

ph

oto

ID fr

om

th

e st

ate

if t

hey

are

ove

r th

e ag

e o

f 65

or

hav

e

alre

ady

qu

ali

ed fo

r st

ate

assi

stan

ce p

rogr

ams.

Bu

t th

at’s

no

t n

ew, a

nd

th

e vo

ter

wo

uld

sti

ll h

ave

to v

isit

a S

ecre

tary

of S

tate

’s o

fce

to

ap

ply

for

the

ID, w

hic

h w

ou

ld o

ther

wis

e co

st $

10

.

Ab

sen

tee

bal

lots

: No

w, a

bse

nte

e b

allo

t ap

plic

ants

mu

st s

ign

an

ap

plic

atio

n, w

hic

h e

lect

ion

staf

fers

co

mp

are

to s

ign

atu

res

on

le

. Un

der

Sen

ate

Bill

28

5, a

bse

nte

e b

allo

t ap

plic

ants

wo

uld

hav

e m

ail c

lerk

s a

copy

of t

hei

r p

ho

to ID

or

bri

ng

it t

o t

he

cler

k’s

of

ce.

An

alys

is: P

olls

sh

ow

th

at v

ote

r ID

pro

po

sals

are

po

pu

lar

amo

ng

vote

rs, m

any

of w

ho

m a

gree

wit

h R

epu

blic

ans

that

th

ey’r

e a

com

mo

nse

nse

eff

ort

to

incr

ease

sec

uri

ty.

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

6/16

Bu

t ex

per

ts a

nd

of

cial

s w

ho

sp

oke

to

Bri

dge

Mic

hig

an s

aid

th

e re

form

s ar

e a

solu

tio

n in

sear

ch o

f a p

rob

lem

an

d c

ou

ld d

isen

fran

chis

e vo

ters

, par

ticu

larl

y th

ose

wh

o a

re le

ss li

kely

to

hav

e a

dri

ver

licen

se b

ecau

se o

f co

st, l

ack

of t

ran

spo

rtat

ion

or

oth

er fa

cto

rs.

Som

e st

ud

ies

esti

mat

e as

man

y as

13

per

cen

t o

f Afr

ican

-Am

eric

an r

esid

ents

nat

ionw

ide

lack

a go

vern

men

t-is

sued

ID. N

atio

nwid

e, a

n e

stim

ated

3 m

illio

n A

mer

ican

s o

f all

race

s la

ck ID

,

acco

rdin

g to

th

e B

ren

nan

Cen

ter

for

Just

ice.

“I’m

su

re it

will

red

uce

vo

ter

turn

ou

t, e

spec

ially

am

on

gst

peo

ple

wit

h lo

wer

inco

me

and

peo

ple

wit

h d

isab

iliti

es,”

said

Inks

ter

Cle

rk F

elic

ia R

utl

edge

, a D

emo

crat

.

It's

un

clea

r h

ow

man

y M

ich

igan

vo

ters

do

n't

hav

e an

ID, a

nd

th

e Se

cret

ary

of S

tate

's o

fce

said

it h

as n

ot

yet

nis

hed

co

mp

ilin

g d

ata

on

th

e n

um

ber

of v

ote

rs w

ho

use

d t

he

afd

avit

op

tio

n la

st y

ear.

Ro

ugh

ly 7

.5 m

illio

n U

.S c

itiz

ens

over

th

e ag

e o

f 18

hav

e a

valid

dri

ver

licen

se o

r ID

car

d,

acco

rdin

g to

th

e st

ate.

Th

ere

are

7.9

mill

ion

ad

ult

s re

sid

ents

in M

ich

igan

, bu

t th

at

gure

incl

ud

es u

nd

ocu

men

ted

imm

igra

nts

an

d o

ther

s n

ot

allo

wed

to

vo

te.

Th

e n

ew ID

req

uir

emen

t fo

r ab

sen

tee

bal

lots

co

uld

als

o p

ose

a c

hal

len

ge fo

r th

ose

wit

ho

ut

a

pri

nte

r o

r p

ho

toco

pie

r, sa

id R

oeb

uck

, th

e O

ttaw

a C

ou

nty

Rep

ub

lican

.

An

d b

y in

clu

din

g a

copy

of t

hei

r ID

in a

n e

asily

iden

tiab

le a

bse

nte

e b

allo

t ap

plic

atio

n

enve

lop

e, v

ote

rs m

ay e

nd

up

su

scep

tib

le t

o id

enti

ty t

hef

t, h

e sa

id.

"Th

e en

d r

esu

lt w

ill b

e le

giti

mat

e b

allo

ts w

ill n

ot

cou

nt

on

Ele

ctio

n D

ay, a

nd

I th

ink

that

's

real

ly u

nfo

rtu

nat

e,"

Ro

ebu

ck s

aid

. "I

've

had

zer

o c

ases

of v

ote

r im

per

son

atio

n b

rou

ght

to m

y

atte

nti

on

in t

he

13

yea

rs t

hat

I've

bee

n a

n e

lect

ion

of

cial

in m

y co

un

ty."

Drop

box

es c

ould

be

bloc

ked,

lock

ed

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

7/16

Wh

at’s

new

: Ab

sen

tee

dro

p b

oxes

bec

ame

po

pu

lar

stat

ewid

e in

20

20

, as

mo

re t

han

70

0 w

ere

pla

ced

in 3

00

-plu

s M

ich

igan

co

mm

un

itie

s la

st y

ear

as a

way

of r

edu

cin

g ex

po

sure

du

rin

g a

glo

bal

pan

dem

ic.

Det

roit

inst

alle

d 3

0 la

st y

ear,

wh

ile t

her

e w

ere

12

in F

lint

and

sev

en in

Gra

nd

Rap

ids.

Un

like

a co

ntr

over

sial

Geo

rgia

law

th

at h

as c

ause

d n

atio

nal

co

ntr

over

sy, t

he

Mic

hig

an

pro

po

sal w

ou

ldn’

t lim

it t

he

nu

mb

er o

f ab

sen

tee

bal

lot

dro

p b

oxes

th

at lo

cal e

lect

ion

of

cial

s

cou

ld u

tiliz

e in

an

ele

ctio

n.

Bu

t Se

nat

e B

ill 2

73

wo

uld

req

uir

e th

e Se

cret

ary

of S

tate

an

d c

ou

nty

Bo

ard

of C

anva

sser

s to

app

rove

any

dro

p b

oxes

, wh

ich

co

uld

allo

w p

arti

san

s to

blo

ck t

hem

at

the

loca

l lev

el.

Un

der

cu

rren

t la

w, e

ach

co

un

ty b

oar

d is

co

mp

ose

d o

f tw

o D

emo

crat

s an

d t

wo

Rep

ub

lican

s.

An

d if

th

ose

tw

o R

epu

blic

ans

wo

n’t

vote

to

ap

pro

ve d

rop

box

es, f

or

inst

ance

, ele

ctio

n o

fci

als

in t

ho

se c

ou

nti

es c

ou

ldn’

t u

se t

hem

.

Sen

ate

Bill

28

6 w

ou

ld r

equ

ire

cler

ks t

o lo

ck d

rop

box

es fo

r th

e la

st t

ime

at 5

p.m

. th

e d

ay

bef

ore

an

ele

ctio

n, m

ean

ing

vote

rs c

ou

ld n

o lo

nge

r u

se a

bse

nte

e b

allo

t d

rop

box

es o

n E

lect

ion

Day

.

Inst

ead

, las

t-m

inu

te a

bse

nte

e vo

ters

wo

uld

nee

d t

o p

erso

nal

ly d

rop

off

th

eir

bal

lot

at t

hei

r

cler

k’s

of

ce. I

f a v

ote

r tr

ied

to

mai

l th

e b

allo

t in

stea

d, i

t lik

ely

wo

uld

no

t re

ach

th

e cl

erk’

s

of

ce b

y th

e ti

me

po

lls c

lose

on

Ele

ctio

n D

ay a

nd

th

eref

ore

wo

uld

no

t b

e co

un

ted

.

Th

e Se

nat

e G

OP

pro

po

sal a

lso

incl

ud

es a

ho

st o

f new

sec

uri

ty r

equ

irem

ents

for

abse

nte

e

bal

lot

dro

p b

oxes

to

en

sure

th

ey a

re lo

cked

an

d m

on

ito

red

at

all t

imes

by

hig

h-d

en

itio

n v

ideo

cam

eras

. It

wo

uld

req

uir

e cl

erks

to

mai

nta

in a

“ch

ain

of c

ust

od

y” lo

g to

do

cum

ent

bal

lot

box

colle

ctio

ns

and

del

iver

ies.

An

d a

ny d

rop

box

mu

st in

clu

de

a w

arn

ing

to v

ote

rs r

emin

din

g th

em

that

th

ey m

ay b

e o

n v

ideo

, an

d t

hat

Mic

hig

an la

w o

nly

allo

ws

a vo

ter

or

thei

r im

med

iate

fam

ily

to d

rop

off

bal

lots

.

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

8/16

An

alys

is: E

lect

ion

of

cial

s sa

y th

ere

is n

o g

oo

d r

easo

n t

o c

lose

dro

p b

oxes

th

e ev

enin

g b

efo

re

the

elec

tio

n, w

hic

h c

an h

elp

red

uce

co

nge

stio

n in

th

e cl

erk’

s o

fce

on

wh

at is

alr

ead

y a

very

bu

sy E

lect

ion

Day

.

An

d in

th

ese

hyp

er-p

arti

san

tim

es, i

t d

oes

n’t

mak

e se

nse

to

co

nd

itio

n t

he

use

of d

rop

box

es o

n

app

rova

l by

cou

nty

bo

ard

s th

at a

re p

arti

san

by

des

ign

, sai

d S

iegr

ist,

th

e C

anto

n T

ow

nsh

ip

Dem

ocr

at.

"I d

on'

t kn

ow

th

at I

tru

st p

eop

le t

hat

tri

ed t

o t

hro

w o

ut

my

vote

to

cer

tify

my

dro

p b

ox,"

Sieg

rist

sai

d, n

oti

ng

he

and

oth

er v

ote

rs w

ere

alm

ost

dis

enfr

anch

ised

last

fall

wh

en

Rep

ub

lican

s o

n t

he

Way

ne

Co

un

ty B

oar

d o

f Can

vass

ers

init

ially

ref

use

d t

o c

erti

fy t

he

loca

l

resu

lts.

Ro

ebu

ck, t

he

Ott

awa

Co

un

ty c

lerk

, sai

d t

he

pro

po

sed

sec

uri

ty m

easu

res

“to

tally

mak

e se

nse

”

so lo

ng

as lo

cal g

over

nm

ents

can

aff

ord

to

pay

for

them

.

Th

e b

ill d

oes

n’t

incl

ud

e an

y fu

nd

ing

for

secu

rity

, th

ou

gh, w

hic

h m

akes

it a

n “

un

fun

ded

man

dat

e,”

argu

ed R

utl

edge

, th

e In

kste

r cl

erk.

“Esp

ecia

lly w

ith

CO

VID

rig

ht

no

w, w

e ju

st d

on’

t h

ave

the

mea

ns,”

sh

e sa

id.

No

mor

e pr

epai

d po

stag

e on

abs

ente

e or

out

side

aid

Wh

at’s

new

: Mic

hig

an v

ote

rs c

ho

se t

o w

rite

no

-rea

son

ab

sen

tee

bal

loti

ng

into

th

e st

ate

con

stit

uti

on

in 2

01

8, a

nd

Rep

ub

lican

legi

slat

ors

co

uld

no

t ch

ange

th

at w

ith

ou

t an

oth

er v

ote

of t

he

peo

ple

.

Bu

t Se

nat

e B

ill 2

87

wo

uld

pro

hib

it lo

cal c

lerk

s fr

om

pro

vid

ing

free

ret

urn

po

stag

e fo

r

abse

nte

e b

allo

ts, e

ven

if t

he

Secr

etar

y o

f Sta

te g

ave

them

fun

din

g to

do

so

.

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

9/16

Pre

-pai

d r

etu

rn p

ost

age

is c

urr

entl

y al

low

ed, b

ut

Rep

ub

lican

s co

nte

nd

it’s

cre

ated

an

un

even

pla

yin

g el

d w

her

e so

me

com

mu

nit

ies

pay

for

retu

rn p

ost

age

and

oth

ers

do

no

t.

Th

e Le

gisl

atu

re c

ou

ld s

olv

e th

at p

rob

lem

by

app

rovi

ng

fun

din

g fo

r st

atew

ide

retu

rn p

ost

age,

bu

t th

e G

OP

pla

n in

stea

d p

rop

ose

s a

bla

nke

t b

an.

Sen

ate

Bill

28

4 w

ou

ld p

roh

ibit

ele

ctio

n o

fci

als

fro

m a

ccep

tin

g o

uts

ide

fun

din

g fo

r el

ecti

on

adm

inis

trat

ion

or

equ

ipm

ent.

Th

is a

pp

ears

to

be

a re

spo

nse

to

gra

nts

fro

m t

he

Cen

ter

for

Tech

an

d C

ivil

Life

th

at w

ere

fuel

ed b

y a

$2

50

mill

ion

co

ntr

ibu

tio

n fr

om

Fac

ebo

ok

fou

nd

er

Mar

k Z

uck

erb

erg.

Tru

mp

su

pp

ort

ers

init

ially

alle

ged

last

yea

r’s

gran

ts t

arge

ted

Dem

ocr

atic

co

mm

un

itie

s, b

ut

the

no

np

rot

rep

ort

s th

at it

pro

vid

ed fu

nd

ing

to e

very

loca

l gov

ern

men

t th

at r

equ

este

d it

,

rega

rdle

ss o

f po

litic

s. M

ore

th

an 4

70

Mic

hig

an c

om

mu

nit

ies,

led

by

Rep

ub

lican

s an

d

Dem

ocr

ats

alik

e, r

ecei

ved

gra

nts

to

hir

e ad

dit

ion

al e

lect

ion

s st

aff,

pay

for

abse

nte

e b

allo

t

mai

lings

, bu

y el

ecti

on

eq

uip

men

t an

d p

erso

nal

pro

tect

ion

eq

uip

men

t fo

r w

ork

ers,

am

on

g

oth

er t

hin

gs.

Zu

cker

ber

g's

invo

lvem

ent

fuel

ed c

on

spir

acy

theo

ries

, bu

t h

e w

asn'

t th

e o

nly

ou

tsid

e fu

nd

er.

Flin

t n

ativ

e K

yle

Ku

zma,

an

NB

A b

aske

tbal

l pla

yer,

gave

th

e ci

ty $

10

,00

0 t

o in

stal

l ab

sen

tee

bal

lot

dro

p b

oxes

last

yea

r. A

nd

, per

hap

s in

adve

rten

tly,

th

e b

ill c

ou

ld a

lso

pro

hib

it g

rou

ps

like

the

Mic

hig

an A

sso

ciat

ion

of M

un

icip

al C

lerk

s fr

om

hel

pin

g lo

cal g

over

nm

ents

pay

for

sup

plie

s.

Sen

ate

Bill

31

0 w

ou

ld p

roh

ibit

th

e st

ate

fro

m m

ailin

g ab

sen

tee

bal

lot

app

licat

ion

s to

vo

ters

wh

o d

id n

ot

req

ues

t o

ne.

Th

e st

ate’

s to

p e

lect

ion

of

cial

co

uld

no

t ev

en s

end

vo

ters

un

solic

ited

po

stca

rds

that

lin

k to

an

on

line

app

licat

ion

form

.

Dem

ocr

atic

Sec

reta

ry o

f Sta

te J

oce

lyn

Ben

son

sp

ent

som

e o

f Mic

hig

an’s

$4

.4 m

illio

n in

fed

eral

ele

ctio

ns

aid

to

mai

l ab

sen

tee

bal

lots

to

vo

ters

acr

oss

th

e st

ate.

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

10/1

6

Th

e M

ich

igan

Co

urt

of A

pp

eals

ru

led

Ben

son

had

th

e au

tho

rity

to

sen

d t

he

app

licat

ion

s, b

ut

Rep

ub

lican

s ar

gued

th

e m

ass

mai

ling

cou

ld o

pen

th

e d

oo

r to

vo

ter

frau

d b

ecau

se s

om

e

app

licat

ion

s w

ere

sen

t to

th

e w

ron

g ad

dre

ss o

r to

dea

d v

ote

rs w

ho

se n

ames

had

no

t ye

t b

een

rem

oved

fro

m t

he

stat

e ro

lls.

An

alys

is:T

her

e is

no

evi

den

ce t

he

mai

lings

led

to

any

frau

d, o

r th

at a

pp

licat

ion

s se

nt

to t

he

wro

ng

add

ress

wer

e lle

d o

ut

illeg

ally

in a

n a

ttem

pt

to r

ecei

ve b

allo

t.

Sieg

rist

no

ted

th

at b

oth

po

litic

al p

arti

es m

aile

d a

bse

nte

e b

allo

t ap

plic

atio

ns

to v

ote

rs, o

ften

alo

ngs

ide

pro

mo

tio

nal

mat

eria

ls t

ellin

g vo

ters

wh

ich

can

did

ates

th

ey s

ho

uld

vo

te fo

r.

"Why

is it

OK

for

po

litic

al p

arti

es t

o s

end

ou

t p

rop

agan

da

wit

h a

pp

licat

ion

s, b

ut

the

gove

rnm

ent

can'

t se

nd

ou

t n

eutr

al a

pp

licat

ion

s?”

he

aske

d. “

Th

is is

tak

ing

po

wer

aw

ay fr

om

the

pro

fess

ion

al e

lect

ion

ad

min

istr

ato

rs a

nd

rea

lly e

nsu

rin

g th

at t

he

pro

cess

is m

ore

par

tisa

n."

Ro

ebu

ck s

aid

th

ere

are

legi

tim

ate

con

cern

s ov

er p

riva

te fu

nd

ing

bei

ng

use

d t

o r

un

pu

blic

elec

tio

ns

— “

wh

at w

ou

ld s

om

e o

f my

Dem

ocr

atic

co

lleag

ues

say

if t

he

DeV

os

fam

ily d

ecid

ed t

o

fun

d e

lect

ion

s in

Mic

hig

an?”

— b

ut

he

no

ted

loca

ls m

ay n

ot

hav

e so

ugh

t th

e gr

ants

last

yea

r

had

th

e Le

gisl

atu

re “a

deq

uat

ely”

fun

ded

ele

ctio

n a

dm

inis

trat

ion

.

Ban

nin

g fr

ee r

etu

rn p

ost

age

for

abse

nte

e b

allo

ts c

ou

ld m

ake

it h

ard

er fo

r so

me

resi

den

ts t

o

vote

, bu

t R

oeb

uck

sai

d p

re-p

aid

env

elo

pes

may

no

t b

e a

goo

d u

se o

f gov

ern

men

t fu

nd

ing

in a

ll

com

mu

nit

ies.

He’

s en

cou

ragi

ng

vote

rs in

Ott

awa

Co

un

ty t

o u

se d

rop

box

es.

“Un

ifo

rmit

y n

eed

s to

be

the

answ

er, a

nd

I d

on'

t u

nd

erst

and

wh

at p

rob

lem

th

at’s

so

lvin

g to

say

that

we

can'

t p

ay fo

r p

ost

age,

” R

oeb

uck

sai

d.

Resu

lts c

ould

be

dela

yed

— a

gain

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

11/1

6

Wh

at’s

new

: Lo

cal e

lect

ion

of

cial

s la

st y

ear

ple

aded

wit

h t

he

Mic

hig

an L

egis

latu

re t

o a

llow

them

to

pro

cess

— a

nd

beg

in c

ou

nti

ng

— a

bse

nte

e b

allo

ts d

ays

or

wee

ks b

efo

re E

lect

ion

Day

.

Th

e R

epu

blic

an m

ajo

rity

gav

e th

em o

ne

day

an

d o

nly

allo

wed

pre

-pro

cess

ing,

wh

ich

esse

nti

ally

am

ou

nte

d t

o o

pen

ing

ou

ter

mai

ling

enve

lop

es a

nd

sta

ckin

g b

allo

ts fo

r co

un

tin

g

the

nex

t d

ay.

Of

cial

s p

red

icte

d le

ngt

hy r

epo

rtin

g d

elay

s, a

nd

th

at h

app

ened

in s

om

e p

arts

of t

he

stat

e,

esp

ecia

lly b

ig c

itie

s w

ith

man

y D

emo

crat

ic v

ote

rs. T

hat

gav

e Tr

um

p a

n o

pen

ing

to fa

lsel

y

clai

m h

e h

ad w

on

Mic

hig

an b

ecau

se h

e le

d e

arly

ret

urn

s.

Sen

ate

Bill

33

4 w

ou

ld m

ake

per

man

ent

that

on

e d

ay w

ind

ow

for

pre

-pro

cess

ing,

bu

t it

wo

uld

no

t ex

pan

d t

he

allo

wan

ce e

ven

th

ou

gh M

ajo

rity

Lea

der

Mik

e Sh

irke

y h

as t

ou

ted

ab

sen

tee

bal

lot

pro

cess

ing

in F

lori

da,

wh

ere

can

beg

in c

ou

nti

ng

abse

nte

e b

allo

ts w

eeks

bef

ore

Ele

ctio

n

Day

.

Sen

ate

Bill

29

9 w

ou

ld c

reat

e a

new

dea

dlin

e fo

r el

ecti

on

cle

rks

to

nis

h c

ou

nti

ng

bal

lots

an

d

rep

ort

res

ult

s to

th

e C

ou

nty

Bo

ard

of C

anva

sser

s by

no

on

th

e d

ay a

fter

th

e el

ecti

on

.

An

alys

is: W

hile

20

20

was

un

usu

al b

ecau

se o

f th

e p

and

emic

, ele

ctio

n o

fci

als

exp

ect

abse

nte

e

voti

ng

to b

e th

e n

ew n

orm

al, a

nd

th

ey c

on

tin

ue

to u

rge

law

mak

ers

to a

llow

th

em t

o b

egin

cou

nti

ng

the

bal

lots

bef

ore

Ele

ctio

n D

ay.

Th

e Se

nat

e G

OP

pla

n d

oes

n’t

do

th

at. I

nst

ead

, it

dem

and

s th

at c

lerk

s sp

eed

up

th

eir

Ele

ctio

n

Day

co

un

ts t

o r

epo

rt a

ll re

sult

s by

no

on

th

e fo

llow

ing

day

, wh

ich

co

uld

be

a ch

alle

nge

in la

rger

citi

es t

hat

ten

d t

o v

ote

Dem

ocr

atic

.

“Cle

arly

, th

e cl

erk

com

mu

nit

y w

as n

ot

con

sult

ed o

n a

ny o

f th

ese

39

bill

s,” s

aid

Ro

ebu

ck, t

he

Ott

awa

Co

un

ty R

epu

blic

an. “

Th

at's

ver

y o

bvio

us.”

Sieg

rist

, th

e D

emo

crat

ic c

lerk

fro

m C

anto

n T

ow

nsh

ip, s

aid

it m

ay b

e im

po

ssib

le fo

r so

me

com

mu

nit

ies

to m

eet

the

dea

dlin

e, w

hic

h w

ou

ld p

ut

them

in a

po

siti

on

of e

ith

er b

reak

ing

the

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

12/1

6

law

or

sto

pp

ing

the

cou

nt.

“Th

ere'

s n

o w

ay w

e're

go

ing

to s

top

tab

ula

tin

g b

allo

ts,”

he

said

. “If

so

meb

od

y re

turn

s a

bal

lot

by t

he

dea

dlin

e, a

nd

we

can'

t p

roce

ss t

hem

by

12

no

on

th

e n

ext

day

, I'm

no

t go

ing

to v

iola

te

thei

r co

nst

itu

tio

nal

rig

ht

to v

ote

. I'll

tak

e th

e d

ing.

Th

ere'

s n

o w

ay w

e're

go

nn

a d

eliv

er a

n

un

nis

hed

ele

ctio

n t

o t

he

cou

nty

.”

Polit

ical

par

ty c

hall

enge

rs c

ould

vid

eo re

cord

Wh

at’s

new

: Th

e Se

nat

e G

OP

pro

po

sal i

ncl

ud

es s

ever

al n

ew t

rain

ing

req

uir

emen

ts fo

r

elec

tio

n w

ork

ers

and

po

ll ch

alle

nge

rs.

Loca

l of

cial

s an

d e

xper

ts s

ay t

hat

’s s

ore

ly n

eed

ed g

iven

th

at d

ram

a th

at u

nfo

lded

last

yea

r at

the

TCF

Cen

ter

in D

etro

it, w

her

e G

OP

ch

alle

nge

rs

oo

ded

an

ab

sen

tee

cou

nti

ng

bo

ard

wit

h

dem

and

s th

at w

ork

ers

“sto

p t

he

cou

nt”

bec

ause

of f

alse

frau

d c

laim

s.

Bu

t el

ecti

on

of

cial

s ar

e co

nce

rned

ab

ou

t Se

nat

e B

ill 2

92

, wh

ich

wo

uld

pro

hib

it n

on

par

tisa

n

gro

up

s fr

om

des

ign

atin

g p

oll

chal

len

gers

allo

wed

to

ob

serv

e an

d c

on

test

th

e va

lidit

y o

f

bal

lots

.

Th

at m

ean

s o

nly

po

litic

al p

arti

es c

ou

ld d

esig

nat

e ch

alle

nge

rs, n

ot

gro

up

s lik

e th

e Le

agu

e o

f

Wo

men

Vo

ters

, th

e A

CLU

an

d t

he

NA

AC

P t

hat

are

cu

rren

tly

gran

ted

acc

ess

to g

uar

d “a

gain

st

the

abu

se o

f th

e el

ecti

ve fr

anch

ise.

”

Sen

ate

Bill

27

6 w

ou

ld a

llow

th

ose

po

litic

al p

arty

po

ll ch

alle

nge

rs t

o v

ideo

rec

ord

bal

lot

tab

ula

tio

n in

sid

e p

olli

ng

pla

ces

and

ab

sen

tee

cou

nti

ng

bo

ard

s.

An

alys

is: A

llow

ing

vid

eo r

eco

rdin

g o

f bal

lot

tab

ula

tio

n m

igh

t b

uild

co

nd

ence

in t

he

cou

nt,

bu

t el

ecti

on

of

cial

s sa

y it

co

uld

als

o je

op

ard

ize

the

fun

dam

enta

l rig

ht

of a

sec

ret

bal

lot,

an

d

po

ten

tial

ly in

tim

idat

e vo

ters

in t

he

pro

cess

.

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

13/1

6

Th

e le

gisl

atio

n w

ou

ld p

roh

ibit

ch

alle

nge

rs fr

om

rec

ord

ing

"th

e p

erso

nal

iden

tica

tio

n" o

f a

vote

r o

r in

tim

idat

ing

them

, bu

t th

at w

ou

ld b

e h

ard

to

en

forc

e, s

aid

Ro

ebu

ck, t

he

Rep

ub

lican

cler

k fr

om

Ott

awa

Co

un

ty.

A ne

w o

ptio

n fo

r ear

ly v

otin

g

Wh

at’s

new

: Tw

o b

ills

in t

he

Sen

ate

pac

kage

co

uld

mak

e it

eas

ier

to v

ote

.

Sen

ate

Bill

27

4 w

ou

ld a

llow

16

-yea

r-o

lds

to p

re-r

egis

ter

wh

en a

pp

lyin

g fo

r th

eir

dri

ver’

s

licen

se, s

o t

hey

co

uld

au

tom

atic

ally

vo

te a

t 1

8.

Sen

ate

Bill

30

0 w

ou

ld c

reat

e a

new

ear

ly v

oti

ng

op

tio

n b

y re

qu

irin

g cl

erks

acr

oss

th

e st

ate

to

op

en fo

r tr

adit

ion

al, i

n-p

erso

n v

oti

ng

on

th

e se

con

d S

atu

rday

bef

ore

an

ele

ctio

n.

Un

der

th

e p

rop

osa

l, lo

cal c

lerk

s w

ou

ld t

abu

late

an

d r

eco

rd v

ote

s th

at d

ay ju

st a

s th

ey d

o o

n

Ele

ctio

n D

ay. B

ut

it w

ou

ld b

e a

felo

ny c

rim

e to

dis

clo

se a

ny r

esu

lts

fro

m t

he

earl

y vo

tin

g

per

iod

un

til p

olls

clo

se a

t 8

p.m

. Ele

ctio

n D

ay.

An

alys

is: M

ich

igan

vo

ters

alr

ead

y ca

n e

ffec

tive

ly v

ote

ear

ly b

y ca

stin

g an

ab

sen

tee

bal

lot

in

per

son

at

thei

r lo

cal c

lerk

's o

fce

. An

d u

nd

er a

co

nst

itu

tio

nal

am

end

men

t ap

pro

ved

by

vote

rs

in 2

01

8, t

ho

se o

fce

s m

ust

be

op

en fo

r at

leas

t ei

ght

ho

urs

on

th

e w

eeke

nd

bef

ore

Ele

ctio

n

Day

.

Th

e Se

nat

e G

OP

pro

po

sal w

ou

ld b

uild

on

th

at v

ote

r ac

cess

, ho

wev

er, a

nd

any

bal

lots

cas

t o

n

the

seco

nd

Sat

urd

ay b

efo

re e

lect

ion

co

uld

be

tab

ula

ted

th

at d

ay.

Th

at’s

a g

oo

d id

ea, s

aid

Ru

tled

ge, t

he

Dem

ocr

atic

Inks

ter

cler

k, w

ho

cal

led

th

e p

rop

osa

l

“an

oth

er w

ay o

f giv

ing

peo

ple

an

op

po

rtu

nit

y to

get

ou

t ea

rly

and

vo

te."

Rel

ated

Art

icle

s:

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

14/1

6

Trum

p al

lies s

anct

ione

d fo

r ‘fr

ivol

ous’

suit

to o

vert

urn

Mic

higa

n el

ecti

on

Au

gust

25

, 20

21

| Jo

nat

han

Oo

stin

g in

Mic

hig

an G

over

nm

ent

Mic

higa

n sh

erif

f enl

ists

pri

vate

eye

to g

rill

cle

rks i

n vo

te fr

aud

prob

e

July

16

, 20

21

| Jo

nat

han

Oo

stin

g in

Mic

hig

an G

over

nm

ent

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

15/1

6

We'

re n

ot

just

a n

ews

org

aniz

atio

n, w

e're

als

o y

ou

r n

eigh

bo

rs

We’

ve b

een

th

ere

for

you

wit

h d

aily

Mic

hig

an C

OV

ID-1

9 n

ews;

rep

ort

ing

on

th

e em

erge

nce

of t

he

viru

s, d

aily

nu

mb

ers

wit

h o

ur

trac

ker

and

das

hb

oar

d, e

xplo

din

g u

nem

plo

ymen

t, a

nd

we

nal

ly w

ere

able

to

rep

ort

on

mas

s

vacc

ine

dis

trib

uti

on

. We

rep

ort

bec

ause

th

e n

ews

imp

acts

all

of u

s. W

ill y

ou

ple

ase

do

nat

e an

d h

elp

us

reac

h o

ur

goal

of 1

5,0

00

mem

ber

s in

20

21

?

Judg

e ey

es sa

ncti

ons i

n ‘K

rake

n’ c

ase

that

soug

ht to

ove

rtur

n M

ichi

gan

vote

July

12

, 20

21

| Jo

nat

han

Oo

stin

g in

Mic

hig

an G

over

nm

ent

9/9/

21, 1

1:12

AM

We

read

all

Mic

higa

n el

ectio

n re

form

bills

. Man

y w

ould

add

hur

dles

to v

otin

g. |

Brid

ge M

ichi

gan

http

s://w

ww.

brid

gem

i.com

/mic

higa

n-go

vern

men

t/we-

read

-all-

mic

higa

n-el

ectio

n-re

form

-bills

-man

y-w

ould

-add

-hur

dles

-vot

ing

16/1

6

Hom

e

Popu

lar

Topi

cs

Spec

ial R

epor

ts

Arch

ive

Abou

t

Subs

crib

e

Cont

act

©20

21 B

ridge

Mic

higa

n. A

ll rig

hts

rese

rved

.

Web

site

by

Grav

ity

Wor

ks

DO

NA

TE

NO

W

EXHIBIT 5

RESEARCH NOTE

A disproportionate burden: strict voter identification laws andminority turnoutJohn Kuk a*, Zoltan Hajnal b* and Nazita Lajevardic*aDepartment of Political Science, University of Oklahoma, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO,USA; bDepartment of Political Science, UCSD, San Diego, CA, USA; cDepartment of Political Science, MichiganState University, East Lansing, MI, USA

ABSTRACTCritics of the recent proliferation of strict photo identification lawsclaim these laws impose a disproportionate burden on racialminorities. Yet, empirical studies of the impact of these laws onminority turnout have reached decidedly mixed results. State andfederal courts have responded by offering mixed opinions aboutthe legality of these laws. We offer a more rigorous test of theselaws by focusing on more recent elections, by relying on officialturnout data rather than surveys, and by employing a moresophisticated research design that assesses change over timeusing a difference-in-difference approach. Our analysis usesaggregate county turnout data from 2012 to 2016 and finds thatthe gap in turnout between more racially diverse and less raciallydiverse counties grew more in states enacting new strict photo IDlaws than it did elsewhere. This analysis provides additionalempirical evidence that strict voter ID laws appear to discriminate.

ARTICLE HISTORYReceived 28 August 2019Accepted 27 April 2020

KEYWORDSRace; American politics; voteridentification; turnout

Strict voter identification laws are proliferating around the country. Prior to 2006, no staterequired citizens to provide a valid photo identification in order to vote. Today, 11 stateshave strict ID laws in place and more states appear to be waiting in the wings. Critics havevilified these laws as anti-democratic and anti-minority (Weiser 2014). From this perspec-tive, strict voter ID laws have little purpose other than to limit the legitimate participationof racial and ethnic minorities and other disadvantaged groups, and to bias outcomes infavor of the Republican legislators who pass them.

But on the other side of the debate supporters have been just as vocal. They argue that voteridentification laws are necessary to reduce voter fraud and instill greater legitimacy in thedemocratic process (Kobach 2011). Advocates also argue that voter identification laws donot reduce the participation of citizens because they do not prevent legitimate voters –almost all of whom have identification – from entering the voting booth. The only thingthat is clear is that the stakes forAmericandemocracy arehighandgrowinghigher by the year.

In many ways, the courts have served as the primary battle site over these laws. Almostevery strict ID law has been challenged in the courts. In one of the most important cases,

© 2020 Western Political Science Association

CONTACT Zoltan Hajnal [email protected]*Authors are listed in random order.

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2020.1773280

POLITICS, GROUPS, AND IDENTITIEShttps://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2020.1773280

Crawford vs Marion County, the Supreme Court ruled that a 2005 strict voter identifi-cation law passed in Indiana was constitutional. But that has not stopped opponentsfrom filing suit against different versions of the law. Currently, voter identification lawsare being litigated in at least six states with laws being challenged in four states as uncon-stitutional (14th and 15th Amendments) and/or in violation of the Voting Rights Act(Alabama, North Carolina, North Dakota, and Wisconsin) and in two others as violatingstate law (Iowa and Missouri).1

In past legal proceedings, the court’s ruling has appeared to rest more than anything elseon the balance between the burden that these laws pose on racial and ethnic minorities andthe state’s interest in the integrity of the electoral process. And, that balance often seems torest on the weight of the empirical evidence about the burden these laws pose to minorities.When the empirical evidence to document a substantial burden has been foundwanting, thecourts – including the Supreme Court – have generally ruled that these laws are consti-tutional.2 When in other cases, more convincing evidence of a real burden has been putforward, several courts have ruled against these laws.3 With the fate of these laws continuesto be adjudicated by the courts, more rigorous empirical evidence is needed.

In all of this, it is important to note that no two voter ID laws are identical and differentlaws in different states may be targeting different groups. For example, North Dakota’sstrict ID law requires an ID with a residential street address which may disproportionatelytarget and impact Native Americans many of who live on reservations without officialstreet addresses. By contrast, Texas’s initial ID law allowed residents to use a concealedcarry gun license but not a state-issued student ID – a pattern that critics felt favoredWhites and disproportionately impacted Blacks and Hispanics.

Existing evaluations of voter ID laws

Unfortunately, despite all of the attention given to these laws, the empirical evidence is notyet entirely convincing one way or another. Crucially, we know that racial and ethnic min-orities are less likely than whites to have ready access to valid identification (Ansolabehere2014; Stewart 2013; GAO 2014; Barreto et al. 2019; Hood and Buchanan 2019). But wouldthese individuals actually vote in the absence of these laws? And would mobilization inopposition to these laws by parties, non-profit organizations, or others actually increaseturnout among some voters (Citrin et al. 2014; Valentino and Neuner 2017)?

When studies go one critical step further and focus on voter turnout and seek to directlyassess whether these laws reduce participation and skew the electorate in favor of oneracial group over another, the results have been decidedly more mixed. Earlier studiestended to find few effects (Alvarez, Bailey, and Katz 2008; de Alth 2009; Mycoff,Wagner, and Wilson 2009; Hood and Bullock 2012). More recent studies tend to demon-strate a significant, if sometimes inconsistent, racially disproportionate impact (Dropp2013; GAO 2014; Hajnal, Lajevardi, and Nielson 2017, 2018; Fraga 2018). Critics are,however, quick to note the data limitations of these studies (Grimmer et al. 2018).

Given the mixed findings to date and given the importance and necessity of persuasiveempirical evidence for the courts to decide the future of voter identification laws in thestates, it is clear that we need a stronger test that will provide greater insight into theimpact of these laws on the minority population and in so doing offer more compellingresults for the courts and policy makers.

2 J. KUK ET AL.

A stronger test

In order to advance the empirical literature and to effectively contribute to the legal debate,any new study needs to address three critical flaws evident inmuch of the existing empiricalstudies. First, it must focus on recent elections and distinguish between strict photo ID lawsand other less stringent ID laws. One reason for the difference in findings between earlierand later studies seems clear. Much of the research published before 2013 focused almostexclusively on the impact of non-strict voter identification laws. That is understandablesince the strictest versions of the lawswere not implemented until recently, but it is also pro-blematic given that it is only strict ID laws that require identification in order to vote.

Second, a new study should rely on official turnout data rather than on potentially pro-blematic survey data as much of the research has done. Much of the scholarship on strictvoter ID laws has focused on self-reported turnout – a major problem since substantialand racially uneven shares of the public over-report turnout (Abramson and Claggett1991; Ansolabehere and Hersh 2012).

The final and perhaps most important concern with the research to date is methodo-logical. As Highton (2017) and others have noted, most studies use cross-sectional datawhen assessing the impact of ID laws but since states that pass these laws so clearlydiffer from states that do not, causal inference is limited. The solution according toHighton (2017) and Erikson and Minnite (2009) is to focus on over time changesthrough a difference-in-difference approach. Unfortunately, no study has yet incorporatedeach of these three elements into a more definitive test.

In this article, we seek to move forward on all three fronts and thus to contribute bothto the empirical debate and to the legal discussion by providing concrete evidence aboutthe consequences of voter identification laws for turnout among marginalized segments ofthe American public. Specifically, our analysis uses a difference-in-difference approach tocompare turnout changes in states that recently implemented strict photo ID laws withturnout changes in states not implementing strict ID laws over the same time period.We focus on turnout changes across the two most recent presidential elections in 2012and 2016. Alabama, Mississippi, Virginia, and Wisconsin all implemented strict photoID laws over this period. We define a strict voter identification law as any electoral lawthat requires voters to present identification before their ballot will be officiallycounted.4 Our test also employs official turnout data, namely official county-level aggre-gate vote totals for all 3142 counties in the United States.5

Our analysis uses two official data sources. First, to measure aggregate turnout in eachcounty in each contest, we compile the official vote totals for each county in each electionand Census data on the voting age population in each county.6 Second, we add Censusdata on the racial and ethnic breakdown of the voting age population by county. By com-bining these two data sources, we can look at how turnout changes from 2012 to 2016 ineach county vary by the racial and ethnic composition of each country. If strict voteridentification laws disproportionately impact racial and ethnic minorities, we wouldexpect aggregate turnout in racially diverse counties to fall more (relative to aggregateturnout in largely White counties) in states that implement new strict ID laws, than itdoes in states that don’t enact new ID laws.7

To try to address the concern that we are using aggregate turnout to try to make infer-ences about individual voter behavior (the ecological fallacy problem), we perform two key

POLITICS, GROUPS, AND IDENTITIES 3

tests in the online appendix (Section 11). One uses data from a state where turnout by raceis officially recorded to show that aggregate country turnout is a reasonable proxy for theturnout of the majority racial group in each county. The other employs a similar differ-ence-in-difference design using validated individual-level vote data from a nationalsurvey to show that strict identification laws have a similar pattern of racial effects atthe individual level. However, we want to be very clear that neither test can definitivelyrule out all concerns related to the ecological inference problem. Ultimately, we canonly say how aggregate turnout changes as counties become more or less raciallydiverse and cannot be certain how turnout by race differs within each county.

Testing the impact of ID laws by modeling changes in turnout between2012 and 2016

The basic test is at its heart direct and straightforward. To determine if the implemen-tation of strict photo ID laws has a racially disparate impact, we look to see if turnout inracially diverse counties declines relative to turnout in predominantly white countiesmore in states enacting strict voter IDs than it does in states not enacting strict IDlaws over the same time period. In other words, we utilize a difference-in-differencedesign. We perform that basic test in several different ways to ensure the robustnessof our findings.

We first undertake a state fixed effects regression analysis that includes all counties in allstates.8 By including state fixed effects, we essentially control for all state-level character-istics that don’t change over this time period. If a state was more Republican or morehostile to minority voting rights in ways that we did not measure, or in ways that arenot measurable at all, that difference would be accounted for in the fixed effects model.But state fixed effects do not control for factors that are changing in each state. Thus,we also include controls for change in every factor that we think could impact turnoutin each state. Specifically, we include the following measures of state electoral conditions:(a) the share of the state’s population that identifies as Democratic, (b) the amount of cam-paign spending in the state in the federal election, (c) the margin of victory in the state inthe presidential election, (d) partisan control of the state Senate, House, and Governor’soffice, (e) whether or not statewide contests were contested, (f) whether or not statewidecontests are open seats, and (g) candidate vote shares in statewide contests. In terms ofstate electoral laws, we control for changes in (a) the registration deadline and whetheror not the state has (b) early voting, (c) vote-by-mail, (d) no excuse absentee ballots,and (e) same day registration. Finally, we also control for the following county-level demo-graphics: (a) educational makeup (percent of adults with a bachelor’s degrees), (b) income(median income), (c) age distribution (median age), (d) gender (percent female), (e) econ-omic conditions (unemployment rate), family structure (share of households with chil-dren), and religion (percent Protestant, percent Catholic, and percent Jewish) of eachcounty. Sources for all variables are detailed in Section 1 of the online appendix. Forbrevity purposes, only the key interaction terms are included in the table. The fullregressions are included in Section 2 of the online appendix.

The first model uses change in turnout between 2012 and 2016 as the dependent vari-able, while the second model employs county turnout in 2016 as the dependent variableand includes county turnout in 2012 as a lagged independent variable.

4 J. KUK ET AL.

The key variable in Table 1 is the interaction between the racial demographics of a givencounty and the implementation of a new strict ID law in the state. As the negative andsignificant interactions in both models in Table 1 show turnout declines significantlymore in racially diverse counties relative to less diverse counties in states that enactstrict ID laws over this period than it does in other states. Substantively, the effect is size-able. Using the estimate from model 2 which is the more conservative estimate of the tworegressions, we find that turnout in counties where 75% of the population was non-Whitedeclined 2.6 percentage points (relative to turnout in all White counties) more in Alabama,Mississippi, Virginia, andWisconsin after those states instituted their strict photo ID laws,than it did in other states.9

Difference-in differences with mean balancing

One concern with the analysis to this point is that the states in the control group that havenot implemented strict ID laws in our time frame may not represent ideal counterfactuals.If turnout trends in these states differ from turnout trends in the four new strict ID states,our results may be skewed. To address this concern, we construct a comparable controlgroup through a mean-balancing method that balances on pre-treatment turnout andother key covariates in the years 2000–2012 before these strict ID laws were put inplace (Hazlett and Xu 2018; see online appendix for details about the method).

Our results using the balancing method match what we found earlier. In Figure 1, weillustrate the impact of strict ID laws for counties with different racial demographicsafter balancing. The figure clearly shows that as the share of the county that is non-white increases, the negative impact of strict ID laws also increases. The model estimatesthat relative to turnout in all White counties, turnout in counties with a 75% non-Whitepopulation declines 1.5 points more in states that just adopted strict ID laws than instates that didn’t implement a strict ID law. Given that the margin of victory in Wiscon-sin in the 2016 Presidential election was only 0.77 percentage points, this is a meaningfuleffect.

In an alternative test, we balanced treated and control counties not only on the outcomevariable – pre-treatment turnout– but also on key covariates like the racial makeup of eachcounty. Fortunately, when we add percent non-white, percent Black, and percent Hispanicto our mean-balancing procedure, we arrive at nearly identical results (see onlineappendix).

Table 1. Testing the racial disparate of strict photo ID laws: 2012–2016.Change in county turnout

(2012–2016)2016 Turnout (w/lagged 2012

turnout)

Percent Minority * New Strict States –.060 (.020)** –.034 (.015)*Percent Minority –.037 (.013)** –.056 (.008)**New Strict States –.044 (.006)** –.026 (.005)**R Squared .66 .98Number of Observations 2599 2599County Demographic Controls Y YChanges in State Political Context and State ElectoralLaws Controls

Y Y

Note: Figures are the regression coefficient and the standard error in parantheses.**Difference is significant at the .01 level.


Robustness checks

As a check on the robustness of these results in the online appendix, we engaged in a series ofdifferent tests which are included in the online appendix. First, since no two voter ID lawsare the same and different laws in different states may be targeting different groups welooked at each strict ID state separately (see Section 6). We find closer to a consistenteffect. The four states that initiated strict ID laws in our period –Alabama,Mississippi,Wis-consin, andVirginia– all experienced exceptionally highdeclines in turnout in racial diversecounties (relative to largely white counties) after those states instituted strict photo ID laws.

It is also possible that the same law affects different racial and ethnic groups differently.Thus, in Section 7 of the online appendix, we looked at the effects of these laws on Blacksand Hispanic separately. Our various tests were, however, inconclusive with some pointingto Blacks being disproportionately targeted by these laws, while others suggested that His-panics were more impacted. In addition, we document other robustness checks that (a)exclude states with preexisting strict ID laws from the comparison set (Section 4), (b) con-ducted a placebo test using the years prior to the implementation of strict ID laws in ourfour states (Section 5), (c) employed a hierarchical linear model (Section 8), (d) only com-pared strict ID states to other Republican-led states (Section 9), and (e) used data on indi-vidual level turnout from North Carolina and the Cooperative Congressional ElectionSurvey to help address concerns of the ecological fallacy (Section 10). These tests helpto confirm the racially disparate impact of these laws.

Implications

Voter ID laws are becoming more common and more strict. The stakes for Americandemocracy are high and growing higher by the year. In this article, we have attempted

Figure 1. The marginal effect of strict photo ID laws conditional on percent minority.

6 J. KUK ET AL.

to provide a rigorous empirical assessment of these laws. By focusing on data from recentelections after strict photo ID laws have been widely implemented, by using officialturnout data to eliminate concerns over inflated and biased turnout patterns from self-reported survey data, and by employing a research design that incorporates longitudinaldata and difference-in-difference tests, our analysis overcomes many of the core problemsfaced by previous studies.

The findings presented here strongly suggest that these laws do, in fact, represent amajor burden that disproportionately affects minorities and significantly alters themakeup of the voting population. Where these laws are enacted, turnout in raciallydiverse counties declines, it declines more than in less diverse areas, and it declinesmore sharply than it does in other states. As a result of these laws, the voices ofracial minorities become more muted and the relative influence of white Americagrows. An already significant racial skew in American democracy becomes all themore pronounced. If courts are indeed trying to gauge the burden these laws imposeon minorities and others, then this new data should help the courts with theirdeliberations.

Notes

1. For a review of active voter identification cases see: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/state-voting-rights-litigation-july-2019.

2. For example, Crawford vs Marion County Election Board (2008).3. For example, United States Courts of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit No. 16-1468 (2016).4. Coding for strict ID laws is based on the National Conference of State Legislators (2019)

except for Alabama which is coded as a strict ID state because the only alternative to present-ing an ID in that state is to have two election officials sign a sworn statement saying that theyknow the voter.

5. Data for the count- level vote totals are from the Atlas of US Elections and the CongressionalQuarterly Voting and Election website.

6. To address migration into or out of the county, we also control for change in the countyvoting age population.

7. Only eight states (AL, GA, FL, LA, NC, PN, SC, and TN) ask for race/ethnicity when citizensregister to vote.

8. Regressions include standard errors clustered at the state level and are weighted by countypopulation size.

9. For this comparison, we drop states that already have strict ID laws. If we include states thatimplemented strict photo ID laws before 2012, the pattern is similar.

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank the Russell Sage Foundation and Robert Lawson for their generoussupport of this research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). Zoltan Hajnal worked as an expertwitness for the NAACP in Greater Birmingham Ministries, et al. vs John. H. Merrill (a strict voteridentification case in Alabama).


Funding

The authors wish to thank the Russell Sage Foundation and Robert Lawson for their generoussupport of this research.

ORCID

John Kuk http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0772-1110Zoltan Hajnal http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7167-780X

References

Abramson, Paul R., and William Claggett. 1991. “Racial Differences in Self-reported and ValidatedTurnout in the 1988 Presidential Election.” The Journal of Politics 53 (1): 186–197.

Alvarez, Michael, Delia Bailey, and Jonathan Katz. 2008. “The Effect of Voter Identification Laws onTurnout.” SSRN Working Paper.

Ansolabehere, Stephen. 2014. “Declaration in Marc Veasey et al v. Rick Perty et al: United StatesDistrict Court, TX.”

Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Eitan Hersh. 2012. “Validation: What Big Data Reveal about SurveyMisreporting and the Real Electorate.” Political Analysis 20 (4): 437–459.

Barreto, Matt, Stephen Nuno, Gabriel Sanchez, and Hannah Walker. 2019. “The RacialImplications of Voter Identification Laws in America.” American Politics Research 47: 238–249.

Citrin, Jack, Green Donald P., and Morris Levy . 2014. “The Effects of Voter ID Notification onVoter Turnout: Results from a Large-Scale Field Experiment.” Election Law Journal 13 (2):228–242.

de Alth, Shelley. 2009. ID at the Polls: Assessing the Impact of Recent State Voter ID Laws on VoterTurnout. Harvard Law & Policy Review, 3 (1): 185–202.

Dropp, Kyle A. 2013. “Voter Identification Laws and Voter Turnout.” Unpublished Manuscript.Erikson, Robert S., and Lorraine C. Minnite. 2009. “Modeling Problems in the Voter Identification

—Voter Turnout Debate.” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy 8 (2): 85–101.Fraga, Bernard. 2018. The Turnout Gap: Race, Ethnicity, and Political Inequality in a Diversifying

America. New York: Cambridge University Press.GAO (General Accounting Office). 2014. Issues Related to State Voter Identification Laws.

Washington, DC: GAO.Grimmer, Justin, Eitan Hersh, Marc Meredith, Jonathan Mummolo, and Clayton Nall. 2018.

“Obstacles to Estimating Voter ID Laws’ Effect onTurnout.”The Journal of Politics 80: 1045–1050.Hajnal, Zoltan, John Kuk, and Nazita Lajevardi. 2018. “We all agree: Strict voter ID laws dispropor-

tionately burden minorities.” The Journal of Politics 80 (3): 1052–1059.Hajnal, Zoltan L., Nazita Lajevardi, and Lindsay Nielson. 2017. “Voter Identification Laws and the

Suppression of Minority Votes.” The Journal of Politics 79 (2): 363–379.Hazlett, Chad, and Yiqing Xu. 2018. “Trajectory Balancing: A General Reweighting Approach to

Causal Inference with Time-Series Cross-Sectional Data.” Working Paper. UCLA and Stanford.Highton, Benjamin. 2017. “Voter Identification Laws and Turnout in the United States.” Annual

Review of Political Science 20: 149–167.Hood, M. V., and Scott E. Buchanan. 2019. “Palmetto Postmortem: Examining the Effects of the

South Carolina Voter Identification Statute.” Political Research Quarterly. doi: 10.1177/1065912919837663.

Hood, M. V., and Charles Bullock. 2012. “Much Ado about Nothing? An Empirical Assessment ofthe Georgia Voter Identification Statute.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 12 (4): 394–414.

Kobach, Kris. 2011. “The Case for Voter ID.” The Wall Street Journal, May 23.Mycoff, Jason, Michael Wagner, and David Wilson. 2009. “The Empirical Effects of Voter-ID Laws:

Present or Absent.” PS, January.

8 J. KUK ET AL.

Stewart III, Charles. 2013. “Voter ID: Who Has Them; Who Shows Them.” Oklahoma Law Review66: 21–52.

Valentino, Nicholas A., and Fabian G. Neuner. 2017. “Why the Sky Didn’t Fall: Mobilizing Anger inReaction to Voter Id Laws.” Political Psychology 38: 331–350.

Weiser, Wendy. 2014. Voter Suppression: How Bad? (Pretty Bad). New York: Brennan Center forJustice.


EXHIBIT 6

https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X18810012

American Politics Research 1 –12

© The Author(s) 2018 Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissionsDOI: 10.1177/1532673X18810012

journals.sagepub.com/home/apr

Research Article

The Racial Implications of Voter Identification Laws in America

Matt A. Barreto1, Stephen Nuño2, Gabriel R. Sanchez3, and Hannah L. Walker4

Abstract

Over 40 states have considered voter identification laws in recent years, with several adopting laws requiring voters to show a valid ID before they cast a ballot. We argue that such laws have a disenfranchising affect on racial and ethnic minorities, who are less likely than Whites to possess a valid ID. Leveraging a unique national dataset, we offer a comprehensive portrait of who does and does not have access to a valid piece of voter identification. We find clear evidence that people of color are less likely to have an ID. Moreover, these disparities persist after controlling for a host of relevant covariates.

Keywords

voter ID laws, racial and ethnic politics

Introduction

Early challenges to voter identification laws equated them with poll taxes,

given it costs money to obtain identification through the department of motor

1University of California, Los Angeles, USA2Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, USA3University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, USA4Rutgers University–New Brunswick, NJ, USA

Corresponding Author:

Hannah L. Walker, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Rutgers University, 89 George Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8554, USA. Email: [email protected]

810012 APRXXX10.1177/1532673X18810012American Politics ResearchBarreto et al.research-article2018

0000000121212 APAP XX 111101000.10.1171177777777777/1577/155315332532323267326773733X3XXXX18X188888881101000000120012 i P liti Rmerican Politics Resear hchAAm B t t lBarreto et al.

2 American Politics Research 00(0)

vehicles (Shanton, 2010). Presented with disproportionately negative impli-

cations for Blacks and Latinos, federal judges stayed laws in Georgia, Texas,

and South Carolina via Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). However,

the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the risk of fraud outweighed burdens to

voters. The decision in Crawford v. Marion County (2008), together with the

invalidation of Section 5 preclearance under Shelby County v. Holder (2013),

rendered Section 2 of the VRA the principal means to federally challenge ID

laws. State constitutional challenges have been inconsistent, leading to a

patchwork outcome. Activists have mounted federal challenges in Texas,

North Carolina, Kansas, and Wisconsin, among other states, a controversy

that heated up in the approach to and aftermath of the 2016 election.

Although challenges to the validity of voter ID laws often draw on data

collected and evaluated by expert witnesses, case law has developed largely

in the absence of comprehensive research on differential access to ID among

population subgroups. Instead, analyses for these cases are limited to the data

in that state, and to bivariate relationships of haves and have nots, raising

questions about the role of other variables, like education, income, and age,

in impacting access to an ID. Finally, analyses connecting ID laws to turnout

suffer from data limitations, and findings are contested. Importantly, we

argue that research overly focused on turnout misses the point of de facto

disenfranchisement, on which we elaborate below. We draw on a unique,

comprehensive dataset to describe the nature and scope of differential access

to ID among racial subgroups. We situate our analysis within the legal and

social science framework at play around voter ID laws to centralize questions

of access to the franchise. We do this to reinforce the argument that racial

differences in access to ID required to vote result from historical institutional

racial exclusion. From this vantage point, questions of impact on aggregate

turnout are secondary. Turnout rates are never universal, and rise and fall

every cycle with competitiveness and quality of candidates. Put simply, the

contest over voter ID laws is one of power, access to democracy, and the

value of civic voice. As such, who has access to documents which allow you

to vote is of primary importance.

Relevant Literature

Concerns over voter fraud propelled the popularity of voter identification laws

after the 2000 election and the 2002 passage of the Help America Vote Act

(HAVA). Despite the fact that there are few documented instances of the kind

of in-person fraud that voter ID laws would prevent, they have withstood con-

stitutional scrutiny when confronted with the demand for electoral integrity

(Minnite, 2007; Stoughton, 2013). Despite claims to electoral integrity,

Barreto et al. 3

scholars demonstrate that partisan motivations enhance the popularity of these

laws (Bentele & O’brien, 2013; Biggers & Hanmer, 2017; Hicks, McKee,

Sellers, & Smith, 2015). Investigating the conditions favorable to their adop-

tion, Hicks et al. (2015) find that competitive legislatures where Republicans

have a slight edge are most likely to pass ID requirements. Republicans strate-

gically leverage such laws to support turnout among their base while undercut-

ting the turnout of Democratic voters (Grossmann & Hopkins, 2015).

Eroding turnout among Democratics is sometimes crafted directly into ID

laws. In Texas, hunting and gun permits, which Whites are statistically more

likely to possess, are legitimate forms of ID but social service cards, more

often held by Blacks and Latinos, are not (Bachu & O’Connell, 1995;

Shanton, 2010). The passage of Alabama’s ID law was accompanied by the

closure of nearly half of the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)

locations, with most closures in disproportionately poor and Black counties

(Watson, 2015). Even when states offer remedial assistance, like Wisconsin’s

provision of a free ID, underlying documentation required for identification

is an onerous burden. One study found nearly 15% of eligible voters, and

20% of Latinos, in Milwaukee County without the documents to get a free ID

(Barreto & Sanchez, 2012a).

Despite the underlying motivation to curtail democratic turnout, the

impact of ID laws on voting is contested. A handful of studies find voter ID

laws have little impact (Erikson & Minnite, 2009; Muhlhausen & Sikich,

2007; Mycoff, Wagner, & Wilson, 2009). Two studies find that the strictest

laws diminish turnout among Blacks and Latinos (Hajnal, Lajevardi, &

Nielson, 2017; Vercellotti & Anderson, 2006). Still other research from

Georgia found that Black turnout in the state increased in 2008 following a

strict ID law. However, this line of inquiry is fettered by data limitations

(Grimmer, Hersh, Meredith, Mummolo, & Nall, 2018).

Mixed findings around turnout obscure the importance of the legal frame-

work within which ID laws operate. Republican lawmakers design ID laws

with marginalized voters in mind. Why and how marginalized citizens over-

come barriers intended to keep them from voting is a point of inquiry impor-

tant to the study of power in American politics. In Georgia in 2008, for

example, Barack Obama’s historic campaign and activists’ mobilization

efforts energized citizens who had a valid piece of ID. Higher turnout among

co-ethnic community members with valid ID does not equate to the negligi-

ble impact of voter ID laws. Singular focus on turnout without centralizing

the real impact of such burdens on access to the franchise is one-dimensional,

operating within the subtext of racial power to reproduce the inequalities that

demand the attention of political scientists in the first place (Murakawa &

Beckett, 2010).


We therefore turn attention to assessing the extent to which ID laws

amount to a racially disparate barrier to the franchise, should one wish to cast

a ballot. Expert reports in several cases challenging ID laws demonstrate by

a variety of methods that Blacks and Latinos are less likely than Whites to

possess an appropriate ID (Barreto & Sanchez, 2012a, 2012b, 2014; Marker,

2014). In Texas, for example, using database matching Stephen Ansolabehere

demonstrated a two-to-five percentage point difference between Hispanic

and White voters possessing a valid ID, which grew to four-to-eight percent-

age points for Blacks (“Plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors’ proposed,” 2014).

Barreto, Nuno, and Sanchez (2009) demonstrate disparate rates of access to

an ID in Indiana, and work by Stewart (2013) suggests that this trend holds

more generally.1 Yet, very little has been published in academic venues cor-

roborating disparate rates of ID possession, nor have these differences been

subjected to more rigorous analysis.

Citizens across the nation face barriers to voting in the form of ID laws. To

address the shortcomings of existing research on this topic, we offer evidence

in three parts. First, we show that ID laws present a greater barrier to voting

for minorities than for Whites, and that these disparities are national in scope.

Second, we demonstrate that racial differences persist after accounting for

relevant covariates, including socioeconomic status. Finally, we assess the

underlying factors that uniquely impact access to an ID among racial sub-

groups. Faced with inconclusive evaluations of voter ID on turnout, a com-

prehensive portrait of “who does or does not have the kinds of identity

documents mandated in recent voter identification legislation” should be

“enough to raise concerns about a disparate impact of voter ID laws” (Erikson

& Minnite, 2009, p. 98).

Data and Method

We leverage six datasets, collected between 2008 and 2014. Surveys were con-

ducted in Wisconsin, Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Texas, were designed to mea-

sure access to an ID given the laws in each state, and to coincide with the time

period when the laws were in place but legally contested. The survey in Indiana

was fielded in October, 2007; in Wisconsin from December, 2011, to January,

2012; in Pennsylvania in June of 2012; and in Texas from March to April, 2014.

We pair these state datasets with two national surveys: the 2008 Collaborative

Multiracial Post-Election Survey (CMPS), fielded from November, 2008, to

January, 2009, and the 2012 American National Election Study (ANES),

fielded from September, 2012, to January, 2013. Across surveys, respondents

were asked whether they had access to an ID, with multiple follow-up ques-

tions to ensure their ID would meet state guidelines. Sampling techniques

Barreto et al. 5

employed in Wisconsin, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Texas, and in the CMPS ensure

a robust sample of non-White and low socioeconomic status eligible voters,

who are most likely to lack an ID and are hard to reach by traditional sampling

methods. Combined, these amount to 18,186 completed interviews, includuing

4,528 Latinos, 4,289 Blacks, 1,064 Asians, 7,763 White non-Hispanics, and

542 of “other race.”

Key issues faced when combing multiple datasets include differences in

sample design, population, question wording, and survey administration

(Tourangeau, 2003). Modes of data collection included telephone, face-to-face

(ANES), and web administration (ANES). The target population varied from

registered voters (in the 2008 CMPS) to all citizen eligible adults (in Wisconsin,

Indiana, Pennsylvania, Texas, and the ANES). Whether one has a valid ID is

coded according to state law in each of the state datasets. In the two national

datasets, valid ID is assessed by asking about a non-expired, state issued ID.

Question wording is thus an issue insofar as we have combined precise mea-

sures in the state datasets with less precise measures in the national datasets.

We do this to enhance the generalizability of the findings, and to gain analytical

leverage among racial subgroups.2 Each individual dataset is weighted to bring

its demographic profile in line with Census estimates for the eligible or regis-

tered population (depending on the sample), and then an overall weight is con-

structed such that the final data matche the national citizen, adult population, as

per Osborne (2011). We include fixed affects for dataset in analyses of the

pooled data. Finally, pooling across multiple sources is not without precedent,

and the statistical leverage gained from increasing the sample size legitimizes

the methodological decision to do so (Kohnen & Reiter, 2009).3

Findings

White respondents were statistically more likely to possess a valid form of ID

than other racial groups in a model only accounting for race across every

dataset included in the analysis. Table 1 displays the percent of each racial

subgroup possessing a valid ID, among both the individual and pooled data-

sets. In both nationally representative datasets, Whites were significantly

more likely to possess a valid ID than were all other racial groups. In all data-

sets but Texas, Blacks were statistically less likely to possess an ID than were

Whites. The same was true for Latinos in all datasets but Pennsylvania. In the

combined dataset, about 81% of Blacks possessed a valid ID, compared with

91% of Whites, 82% of Latinos, 85% of Asians, and 86% of those who iden-

tify some other way. In the pooled dataset, Asians and those who identify

some other way are statistically less likely to possess a valid ID than are

Whites, although these relationships are not consistent.4


The disparate impact of voter ID laws on Blacks, Latinos, and those of

some other race persists after controlling for a variety of relevant covariates.

Figure 1 displays the logistic regression coefficients and confidence intervals

resulting from an abbreviated and fully specified multivariate analysis of

access to a valid ID among eligible voters in the pooled sample.5 After includ-

ing appropriate controls, the relationship between possession of a valid ID

and identifying as Asian continues to be negative but is no longer statistically

significant. Figure 1 is most useful for comparing the relative effect size for

each of the variables in the model, and reveals that the magnitude of the nega-

tive impact of race on the likelihood of having a valid ID is substantial, out-

stripping other relevant variables like age, gender, and having been born

outside the United States. Figure 2 displays the predicted probability of pos-

sessing an ID among each racial subgroup. Whites have a probability of hav-

ing a valid ID of about 90% both in the abbreviated and multivariate models.

In contrast, Blacks in the abbreviated model have a predicted probability of

ID possession of .81, which improves to .85 in the multivariate model.

Likewise, Latinos in the abbreviated model have a predicted probability of

having an appropriate ID of about .82, which improves to .85. Among Asian

respondents, the likelihood of possessing a valid ID improves from .85 to .87,

and in the fully specified model is no longer statistically distinguishable from

Whites. Among those who identify with some other racial group, controlling

for relevant covariates does not diminish the spastically negative relationship

between race and ID possession.

In addition to age, gender, and having been born outside the United States,

education, income, and homeownership also impact ID possession (Figure

1). Age may negatively impact the likelihood of having an ID by way of

expiration, where the elderly are less likely to drive and thus less likely to

have an updated license. Younger individuals may rely on a student ID issued

Table 1. Percent Possessing a Valid Piece of Voter ID, by Race and Dataset.

Combined ANES CMPS Indiana Pennsylvania Texas Wisconsin

White 90.5 93.1 88.1 85.8 86.7 90.8 92.7Black 81.2*** 82.7*** 78.0*** 73.6*** 84.4** 86.9 82.7***Latino 82.0*** 81.5*** 80.8*** 72.7 78.4* 83.2*** 83.2***Asian 84.9*** 86.2*** 80.9** 91.7 100.0 100.0 87.5Other race 85.5*** 84.0*** − 79.6 69.6** 92.9 89.4

Note. ANES = American National Election Study; CMPS = Collaborative Multiracial Post-Election Survey.*p < .1. **p < .05. ***p < .01; Significance levels reflect logistic regression analysis, and racial categories are statistically different from White; estimates are weighted.

Barreto et al. 7

Figure 1. The marginal effects of relevant variables on likelihood of possessing a valid piece of voter ID, in an abbreviated and fully specified model.Note. HS = high school.

Figure 2. The predicted likelihood of possessing a valid piece of voter identification by race and model.Note. Point estimates reflect the pooled sample of eligible voters.


by a university, which often do not conform to ID regulations in a given state.

Women may be less likely to have an ID as result of changing one’s name

after marriage. Education, income, and homeownership are associated with

an increased likelihood of ID possession insofar as individuals with greater

civic knowledge and material resources are likely to have the skills needed to

navigate public agencies, and the resources to secure appropriate ID.

The above analysis highlights that, while courts rely on bivariate evidence

of racially disparate impact, when subjected to more rigorous analysis the

independent, negative effects of race persist. This raises questions around

underlying factors that might account for the enduring race gap. We explore

this further by examining differences in the various factors that are associated

with ID possession among racial subsamples, displayed in Figure 3. Some

factors consistently influence ID possession across all groups, like home-

ownership and income. However, there are differences. Among Blacks, edu-

cation is positively and statistically associated with the likelihood of having

an ID. Education is also positively associated with ID possession among

Latinos, although it is not statistically significant. Among Whites, other fac-

tors are important predictors of lacking an ID, including being over the age of

65 years, a Democrat, and female.

Figure 3. The marginal effects of relevant variables on likelihood of possessing a valid piece of voter identification, among racial subgroups.Note. HS = high school.

Barreto et al. 9

While these factors likely compound barriers to accessing an ID among

Blacks and Latinos, socioeconomic factors like education and income are of pri-

mary importance for these groups. An examination of the predicted probabilities

of having a valid ID given less than a high school education compared with hav-

ing a postgraduate degree reveals that Whites with lesser education are no more

likely to have a valid ID than are their educated counterparts (.94 among those

without a high school degree compared with .937 among those with a postgradu-

ate degree). In contrast, high levels of education increase the likelihood of having

an ID by about eight percentage points among Blacks (.79 compared with .87)

and three percentage points among Latinos (.81 compared with .84).

Conclusion

This analysis was undertaken to offer a comprehensive evaluation of the scope

of the racially disparate impact of voter ID laws. Existing research demon-

strates that voter ID laws are partisan tools, designed with the marginalized

fringe of the Democratic party in mind, to shape the electorate primarily in

favor of state Republican legislatures facing competitive elections. Voting

rights activists levy challenges to such laws, focusing on disparate access to

appropriate ID among people of color. Legal precedent has developed largely

in the absence of evidence that the disparate impact of ID laws extends beyond

a few key states, endures beyond class, and diminishes turnout. The best evi-

dence available suggests that voter ID laws have a negative, racially disparate

impact on turnout across the states (Hajnal, Kuk, & Lajevardi, 2018; Hajnal

et al., 2017). Our analysis joins this research to demonstrate that racial dispari-

ties in access to identification appropriate for voting persist even after account-

ing for important covariates like education and income, underscoring the

privileges accrued to Whites through a history of institutional racial exclusion.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,

authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publi-

cation of this article.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.


Notes

1. Stewart (2013) draws on a survey of 10,000 respondents to examine who has

ID and who is asked to show it. While his measures of ID possession are very

general, he finds that Latinos are asked to show an ID in states that lack ID laws,

raising questions about implementation beyond the discriminatory nature of the

laws themselves.

2. We have included findings by dataset, and among a pooled subset that excludes

the national datasets to demonstrate that the substantive findings hold among a

more conservative sample in the online appendix.

3. Further details for each survey are included in the online appendix.

4. Certain scholars and justices have opined that the implications of voter ID laws

for voting are likely minimal as those most impacted by the laws are unlikely

to vote. We therefore examined the relationship between race and possessing a

valid ID among registered voters and those who indicated they had voted in the

election prior to the survey. Racial disparities persist even among prior voters,

among whom 91% of Whites possessed an ID, compared with 82%, 85%, and

87% of their Black, Latino, and Asian counterparts. An analysis among voting

subgroups is located in the online appendix.

5. Figure 1 excludes fixed effects for dataset as well as the missing categories for

income and education for brevity and elegance of presentation, although the

coefficients reflect fully specified models. The corresponding tables are located

in the online appendix, as is a multivariate analysis of each independent dataset.

References

Bachu, A., & O’Connell, M. (1995). Mothers who receive AFDC payments (Statistical

brief). U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population

/socdemo/statbriefs/sb2-95.html

Barreto, M. A., Nuno, S. A., & Sanchez, G. R. (2009). The disproportionate impact of

voter-ID requirements on the electorate—New evidence from Indiana. Political Science & Politics, 42, 111-116.

Barreto, M. A., & Sanchez, G. (2012a). Rates of possession of accepted photo identi-fication, among different subgroups in the eligible voter population, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin (Expert report). American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved

from https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/062-10-exhibitjexpertreport.pdf

Barreto, M. A., & Sanchez, G. (2012b). Rates of possession of valid photo iden-tification, and public knowledge of the voter ID law in Pennsylvania (Expert

report). American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved from https://www.aclupa.org

/files/2513/7960/9091/Barreto.pdf

Barreto, M. A, & Sanchez, G. (2014). Accepted photo identification and different subgroups in the eligible voter population, State of Texas, 2014 (Expert report).

Latino Decisions. Retrieved from http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/wp-con-

tent/uploads/2014/10/Texas-Voter-ID-Expert-Report_Barreto_Sanchez.pdf

Barreto et al. 11

Bentele, K. G., & O’brien, E. E. (2013). Jim Crow 2.0? Why states consider and adopt

restrictive voter access policies. Perspectives on Politics, 11, 1088-1116.

Biggers, D. R., & Hanmer, M. J. (2017). Understanding the adoption of voter identi-

fication laws in the American states. American Politics Research, 45, 560-588.

Erikson, R. S., & Minnite, L. C. (2009). Modeling problems in the voter identifica-

tion—Voter turnout debate. Election Law Journal, 8, 85-101.

Grimmer, J., Hersh, E., Meredith, M., Mummolo, J., & Nall, C. (2018). Obstacles to esti-

mating voter ID laws? Effect on turnout. The Journal of Politics, 80(3), 1045-1051.

Grossmann, M., & Hopkins, D. A. (2015). Ideological republicans and group interest

democrats: The asymmetry of American party politics. Perspectives on Politics,

13, 119-139.

Hajnal, Z., Kuk, J., & Lajevardi, N. (2018). We all agree: Strict voter ID laws dispro-

portionately burden minorities. The Journal of Politics, 80(3), 1052-1059.

Hajnal, Z., Lajevardi, N., & Nielson, L. (2017). Voter identification laws and the sup-

pression of minority votes. The Journal of Politics, 79, 363-379.

Hicks, W. D., McKee, S. C., Sellers, M. D., & Smith, D. A. (2015). A principle or

a strategy? Voter identification laws and partisan competition in the American

States. Political Research Quarterly, 68(1), 18-33.

Kohnen, C. N., & Reiter, J. P. (2009). Multiple imputation for combining confidential

data owned by two agencies. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A,

172, 511-528.

Marker, D. A. (2014). The statistical role in voter identification (ID) laws. Statistics and Public Policy, 1, 46-50.

Minnite, L. (2007). The politics of voter fraud (Report). Project Vote. Retrieved from

http://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/Politics_of_Voter_

Fraud_Final.pdf

Muhlhausen, D. B., & Sikich, K. W. (2007). New analysis shows voter identification laws do not reduce turnout (A report of the Heritage Center for Data Analysis).

Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/report/new-analysis-

shows-voter-identification-laws-do-not-reduce-turnout

Murakawa, N., & Beckett, K. (2010). The penology of racial innocence: The erasure

of racism in the study and practice of punishment. Law & Society Review, 44,

695-730.

Mycoff, J. D., Wagner, M. W., & Wilson, D. C. (2009). The empirical effects of

voter-ID laws: Present or absent? Political Science & Politics, 42, 121-126.

Osborne, J. W. (2011). Best practices in using large, complex samples: The impor-

tance of using appropriate weights and design effect compensation. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 16(12), 1-7.

Plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors’ proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.

(2014). Expert report of Brennan Center for Justice. Retrieved from https://www

.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/Findings.pdf

Shanton, K. (2010). A portrait of hunters and hunting license trends: National report (national Shooting Sports Foundation). Retrieved from http://www.michigandnr.

com/FTP/wildlife/aversb/MWL/Hunting_Heritage/Southwick%20NSSF%20

Hunter%20Churn%20Natl%20Report.pdf


Stewart, C. (2013). Voter ID: Who has them; who shows them. Oklahoma Law Review, 66, 21-52.

Stoughton, K. M. (2013). A new approach to voter ID challenges: Section 2 of the

Voting Rights Act. The George Washington Law Review, 81, 292-327.

Tourangeau, R. (2003). Recurring surveys: Issues and opportunities. Washington,

DC: National Science Foundation.

Vercellotti, T., & Anderson, D. (2006). Protecting the franchise, or restricting it?

The effects of voter identification requirements on turnout. Manuscript, Rutgers

University, New Brunswick, NJ.

Watson, S. (2015). Alabama’s DMV shutdown has everything to do with race

(Report). American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org

/blog/speak-freely/alabamas-dmv-shutdown-has-everything-do-race

Author Biographies

Matt A. Barreto is a professor of Political Science and Chicana/o Studies at the

University of California, Los Angeles, and co-cofounder of the research firm Latino

Decisions.

Stephen Nuno is an associate professor and Chair of Politics and International Affairs

at Northern Arizona University.

Gabriel R. Sanchez is a professor of Political Science at the University of New

Mexico, where he is also the Executive Director of the Center for Social Policy.

Hannah L. Walker is an assistant professor of Political Science and Criminal Justice

at Rutgers University.

EXHIBIT 7

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

1/19

NU

MB

ER

S,

FA

CTS

AN

D T

RE

ND

S S

HA

PIN

G Y

OU

R W

OR

LDN

EW

SLE

TTE

RS

DO

NA

TEM

Y A

CC

OU

NT

See

our r

esea

rch

on: A

bort

ion

| Af

ghan

ista

n |

COVI

D-1

9

Sear

ch p

ewre

sear

ch.o

rg...

RES

EAR

CH T

OPI

CS

ALL

PUB

LICA

TIO

NS

MET

HO

DS

SHO

RT

REA

DS

TOO

LS &

RES

OU

RCE

SEX

PER

TSAB

OU

T

Hom

e R

esea

rch

Topi

cs

New

s H

abits

& M

edia

M

edia

& S

ocie

ty

Pol

itics

& M

edia

T

rust

, Fac

ts &

Dem

ocra

cy

B

eyon

d D

istr

ust:

How

Am

eric

ans

View

The

ir G

over

nmen

t

RE

PO

RT

NO

VE

MB

ER

23

,2

01

5

BE

YO

ND

DIS

TRU

ST:

HO

WA

ME

RIC

AN

SV

IEW

THE

IRG

OV

ER

NM

EN

T

A m

ajor

fact

or in

the

publ

ic’s

neg

ativ

e at

titu

des

abou

t the

fede

ral g

over

nmen

t is

its

deep

skep

tici

sm o

f ele

cted

off

icia

ls. U

nlik

e op

inio

ns a

bout

gov

ernm

ent p

erfo

rman

ce a

nd p

ower

,R

epub

lican

s an

d D

emoc

rats

gen

eral

ly c

oncu

r in

thei

r cr

itic

ism

s of

ele

cted

off

icia

ls.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

2/19

Ask

ed to

nam

e th

e bi

gges

t pro

blem

wit

h go

vern

men

t tod

ay, m

any

cite

Con

gres

s, p

olit

ics,

or a

sen

se o

f cor

rupt

ion

or u

ndue

out

side

influ

ence

. At t

he s

ame

tim

e, la

rge

maj

orit

ies

ofth

e pu

blic

vie

w e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

as

out o

f tou

ch, s

elf-

inte

rest

ed, d

isho

nest

and

sel

fish.

And

a 55

% m

ajor

ity

now

say

that

ord

inar

y A

mer

ican

s w

ould

do

a be

tter

job

at s

olvi

ng th

ena

tion

’s p

robl

ems

than

thei

r el

ecte

d re

pres

enta

tive

s.

The

2016

cam

paig

n is

on

pace

to b

reak

rec

ords

for

cam

paig

n sp

endi

ng. A

larg

e m

ajor

ity

ofA

mer

ican

s (7

6%) –

incl

udin

g id

enti

cal s

hare

s of

Rep

ublic

ans

and

Dem

ocra

ts –

say

mon

eyha

s a

grea

ter

role

on

polit

ics

than

in th

e pa

st. M

oreo

ver,

larg

e m

ajor

itie

s of

bot

hD

emoc

rats

(84%

) and

Rep

ublic

ans

(72%

) fav

or li

mit

ing

the

amou

nt o

f mon

ey in

divi

dual

san

d or

gani

zati

ons

can

spen

d on

cam

paig

ns a

nd is

sues

.

��

��

Just

19%

say

ele

cted

off

icia

ls in

Was

hing

ton

try

hard

to s

tay

in to

uch

wit

h vo

ters

bac

kho

me;

77%

say

ele

cted

off

icia

ls lo

se to

uch

wit

h th

e pe

ople

qui

ckly

.

A s

imila

r 74

% s

ay m

ost e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

“do

n’t c

are

wha

t peo

ple

like

me

thin

k”; j

ust 2

3%sa

y el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls c

are

wha

t the

y th

ink.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

3/19

The

publ

ic a

lso

cast

s do

ubt o

n th

e co

mm

itm

ent o

f ele

cted

off

icia

ls to

put

the

coun

try’

sin

tere

sts

ahea

d of

thei

r ow

n. R

ough

ly th

ree-

quar

ters

(74%

) say

ele

cted

off

icia

ls p

ut th

eir

own

inte

rest

s ah

ead

of th

e co

untr

y’s,

whi

le ju

st 2

2% s

ay e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

put

the

inte

rest

sof

the

coun

try

first

.

Thes

e vi

ews

are

wid

ely

held

acr

oss

the

polit

ical

spe

ctru

m, t

houg

h co

nser

vati

veR

epub

lican

s an

d R

epub

lican

lean

ers

are

part

icul

arly

like

ly to

say

ele

cted

off

icia

ls a

re s

elf-

inte

rest

ed: 8

2% s

ay th

is, c

ompa

red

wit

h 71

% o

f mod

erat

e an

d lib

eral

Rep

ublic

ans,

and

sim

ilar

prop

orti

ons

of c

onse

rvat

ive

and

mod

erat

e (6

9%) a

nd li

bera

l (73

%) D

emoc

rats

.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

4/19

Neg

ativ

e vi

ews

of p

olit

icia

ns o

n th

ese

mea

sure

s ar

e no

thin

g ne

w, t

houg

h th

e se

nse

that

polit

icia

ns d

on’t

care

wha

t peo

ple

thin

k is

mor

e w

idel

y he

ld in

rec

ent y

ears

: Tod

ay, 7

4%sa

y th

is, u

p fr

om 6

9% in

201

1, 6

2% in

200

3, a

nd a

nar

row

er 5

5% m

ajor

ity

in 2

000.

Maj

orit

ies

acro

ss p

arty

line

s sa

y po

litic

ians

don

’t ca

re m

uch

abou

t wha

t the

y th

ink,

thou

ghas

has

bee

n th

e ca

se s

ince

201

1, m

ore

Rep

ublic

ans

than

Dem

ocra

ts c

urre

ntly

say

this

(78%

vs. 6

9%).

In

2004

, whe

n bo

th th

e pr

esid

ency

and

Con

gres

s w

ere

held

by

the

GO

P,D

emoc

rats

(71%

) wer

e m

ore

likel

y th

an R

epub

lican

s (5

4%) t

o sa

y el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls in

Was

hing

ton

didn

’t ca

re m

uch

abou

t the

m. T

hrou

ghou

t muc

h of

the

late

199

0s, t

here

wer

eno

sig

nific

ant p

arti

san

diff

eren

ces

in th

ese

view

s.

��

��

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

5/19

Whe

n as

ked

to n

ame

in th

eir

own

wor

ds th

e bi

gges

t pro

blem

they

see

wit

h el

ecte

d of

ficia

lsin

Was

hing

ton,

man

y A

mer

ican

s vo

lunt

eer

issu

es w

ith

thei

r in

tegr

ity

and

hone

sty,

or

men

tion

con

cern

s ab

out h

ow th

ey r

epre

sent

thei

r co

nsti

tuen

ts.

The

influ

ence

of s

peci

al in

tere

st m

oney

on

elec

ted

offic

ials

tops

the

list o

f nam

edpr

oble

ms;

16%

say

this

. Ano

ther

11%

see

ele

cted

off

icia

ls a

s di

shon

est o

r as

liar

s. T

hese

conc

erns

are

nam

ed b

y si

mila

r pr

opor

tion

s of

Rep

ublic

ans

and

Dem

ocra

ts.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

6/19

One

-in-

ten

resp

onde

nts

(10%

) say

ele

cted

off

icia

ls a

re o

ut o

f tou

ch w

ith

Am

eric

ans,

and

anot

her

10%

say

they

onl

y ca

re a

bout

thei

r po

litic

al c

aree

rs. R

epub

lican

s an

d R

epub

lican

-le

anin

g in

depe

nden

ts a

re s

light

ly m

ore

likel

y th

an D

emoc

rats

to n

ame

thes

e as

pro

blem

s.

In c

ontr

ast,

Dem

ocra

ts a

re tw

ice

as li

kely

as

Rep

ublic

ans

to v

olun

teer

that

the

bigg

est

prob

lem

wit

h el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls is

that

they

are

not

will

ing

to c

ompr

omis

e (1

4% v

s. 7

%).

��

��

��

��

To th

e ge

nera

l pub

lic, e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

in W

ashi

ngto

n ar

e no

t muc

h di

ffer

ent f

rom

the

typi

cal A

mer

ican

whe

n it

com

es to

thei

r in

telli

genc

e or

thei

r w

ork

ethi

c, b

ut th

ey a

revi

ewed

as

cons

ider

ably

less

hon

est,

som

ewha

t les

s pa

trio

tic

and

som

ewha

t mor

e se

lfish

.

Two-

thir

ds (6

7%) s

ay th

at “

inte

llige

nt”

desc

ribe

s el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls a

t lea

st fa

irly

wel

l, th

esa

me

shar

e th

at s

ays

this

abo

ut th

e ty

pica

l Am

eric

an. B

usin

ess

lead

ers,

by

com

pari

son,

are

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

7/19

seen

as

mor

e in

telli

gent

(83%

say

this

des

crib

es th

em a

t lea

st fa

irly

wel

l).

Abo

ut h

alf o

f Am

eric

ans

say

elec

ted

offic

ials

(48%

) and

ave

rage

Am

eric

ans

(50%

) are

lazy

;ju

st 2

9% s

ay th

is a

bout

bus

ines

s le

ader

s.

But

ass

essm

ents

of e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

’ hon

esty

are

far

mor

e ne

gati

ve. J

ust 2

9% s

ay th

at“h

ones

t” d

escr

ibes

ele

cted

off

icia

ls a

t lea

st fa

irly

wel

l, w

hile

69%

say

“ho

nest

” do

es n

otde

scri

be e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

wel

l. B

usin

ess

lead

ers

are

view

ed m

ore

posi

tive

ly: 4

5% s

ay th

eyar

e ho

nest

. And

nea

rly

seve

n-in

-ten

(69%

) con

side

r th

e ty

pica

l Am

eric

an h

ones

t.

Abo

ut s

ix-i

n-te

n (6

3%) v

iew

ele

cted

off

icia

ls a

s pa

trio

tic,

a la

rger

sha

re th

an s

ays

this

abou

t bus

ines

s le

ader

s (5

5%).

Sti

ll, fa

r m

ore

(79%

) vie

w o

rdin

ary

Am

eric

ans

as p

atri

otic

than

say

this

abo

ut e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

.

And

the

publ

ic o

verw

helm

ingl

y th

inks

of e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

as

selfi

sh: 7

2% s

ay th

is d

escr

ibes

them

at l

east

fair

ly w

ell,

incl

udin

g 41

% w

ho s

ay th

is tr

ait d

escr

ibes

them

“ve

ry w

ell.”

Thou

gh s

imila

r sh

ares

say

the

term

“se

lfish

” ap

plie

s at

leas

t fai

rly

wel

l to

both

bus

ines

sle

ader

s (6

7%) a

nd th

e ty

pica

l Am

eric

an (6

8%),

few

er s

ay it

des

crib

es th

ose

grou

ps v

ery

wel

l.

Maj

orit

ies

of R

epub

lican

s an

d R

epub

lican

-lea

ning

inde

pend

ents

, and

Dem

ocra

ts a

ndD

emoc

rati

c-le

anin

g in

depe

nden

ts, s

ee e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

as

inte

llige

nt, p

atri

otic

and

sel

fish,

thou

gh th

ere

are

mod

est d

iffer

ence

s in

the

rati

ngs

of e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

acr

oss

part

y lin

es.

Onl

y ab

out a

thir

d of

Dem

ocra

ts (3

4%) a

nd e

ven

few

er R

epub

lican

s (2

5%) s

ay “

hone

st”

desc

ribe

s el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls. S

imila

rly

mod

est g

aps

are

seen

on

othe

r tr

aits

, wit

h D

emoc

rats

cons

iste

ntly

vie

win

g el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls m

ore

posi

tive

ly (a

nd le

ss n

egat

ivel

y) th

anR

epub

lican

s.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

8/19

Ther

e ar

e fe

w d

iffer

ence

s be

twee

n D

emoc

rats

and

Rep

ublic

ans

on v

iew

s of

the

typi

cal

Am

eric

an. M

ajor

itie

s in

bot

h pa

rtie

s ra

te th

e ty

pica

l Am

eric

an a

s in

telli

gent

, hon

est a

ndpa

trio

tic,

alb

eit s

elfis

h.

Rep

ublic

ans

expr

ess

mor

e po

siti

ve v

iew

s of

bus

ines

s le

ader

s th

an d

o D

emoc

rats

. Mor

eR

epub

lican

s th

an D

emoc

rats

say

“pa

trio

tic”

des

crib

es b

usin

ess

lead

ers

very

or

fair

ly w

ell

(66%

vs.

48%

). A

nd w

hile

Dem

ocra

ts r

ate

elec

ted

offic

ials

and

bus

ines

s le

ader

s si

mila

rly

on h

ones

ty (r

espe

ctiv

ely,

34%

and

39%

say

eac

h is

hon

est)

, Rep

ublic

ans

are

twic

e as

like

lyto

cal

l bus

ines

s le

ader

s ho

nest

than

to s

ay th

is a

bout

ele

cted

off

icia

ls (5

5% v

s. 2

5%).

��

��

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

9/19

Just

12%

of A

mer

ican

s ha

ve a

ttit

udes

acr

oss

a va

riet

y of

mea

sure

s th

at s

ugge

st th

ey v

iew

elec

ted

offic

ials

pos

itiv

ely

(ten

ding

to r

ate

elec

ted

offic

ials

as

hone

st, i

ntel

ligen

t, in

touc

hw

ith

and

conc

erne

d ab

out a

vera

ge A

mer

ican

s, a

nd p

utti

ng th

e co

untr

y’s

inte

rest

abo

veth

eir

own

self-

inte

rest

), w

hile

57%

larg

ely

view

ele

cted

off

icia

ls n

egat

ivel

y (t

endi

ng to

take

the

oppo

sing

vie

w o

n th

ese

mea

sure

s); a

bout

thre

e-in

-ten

(31%

) hol

d ab

out a

n eq

ual m

ixof

pos

itiv

e an

d ne

gati

ve v

iew

s of

pol

itic

ians

.

Thes

e vi

ews

of e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

are

str

ongl

y co

rrel

ated

wit

h ov

eral

l att

itud

es a

bout

gove

rnm

ent.

Am

ong

thos

e w

ith

posi

tive

vie

ws

of p

olit

icia

ns, 5

3% s

ay th

ey tr

ust

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

10/1

9

gove

rnm

ent a

ll or

mos

t of t

he ti

me;

am

ong

thos

e w

ith

nega

tive

vie

ws,

just

7%

do.

And

whi

le 4

2% o

f tho

se w

ith

posi

tive

vie

ws

say

they

are

“ba

sica

lly c

onte

nt”

wit

h th

e fe

dera

lgo

vern

men

t and

just

4%

exp

ress

ang

er, j

ust 9

% o

f tho

se w

ith

nega

tive

vie

ws

of e

lect

edof

ficia

ls s

ay th

ey a

re c

onte

nt a

nd fu

lly 2

9% e

xpre

ss a

nger

.

��

The

publ

ic is

als

o di

vide

d ov

er th

e ex

tent

to w

hich

ele

cted

off

icia

ls s

houl

d m

ake

com

prom

ises

wit

h pe

ople

wit

h w

hom

they

dis

agre

e. W

hile

49%

of t

he p

ublic

say

they

like

elec

ted

offic

ials

who

com

prom

ise,

47%

say

they

pre

fer

thos

e w

ho s

tick

to th

eir

posi

tion

s.

Am

ong

part

isan

s an

d le

anin

g in

depe

nden

ts, t

houg

h, th

ere

is a

cle

arer

pre

fere

nce.

Nea

rly

six-

in-t

en R

epub

lican

s an

d R

epub

lican

lean

ers

(59%

) lik

e el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls w

ho s

tick

toth

eir

posi

tion

s. T

he p

refe

renc

e is

esp

ecia

lly s

tron

g am

ong

cons

erva

tive

Rep

ublic

ans,

65%

of w

hom

say

this

.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

11/1

9

In c

ontr

ast,

60%

of D

emoc

rats

and

Dem

ocra

tic

lean

ers

pref

er e

lect

ed o

ffic

ials

who

mak

eco

mpr

omis

es o

ver

thos

e w

ho s

tick

to th

eir

posi

tion

s. T

wo-

thir

ds o

f lib

eral

Dem

ocra

ts(6

7%) a

gree

. Thi

s id

eolo

gica

l div

ide

over

com

prom

ise

in p

rinc

iple

is li

ttle

diff

eren

t tod

ayfr

om in

rec

ent y

ears

.

��

As

was

the

case

five

yea

rs a

go, m

ore

Am

eric

ans

blam

e pr

oble

ms

wit

h C

ongr

ess

on th

em

embe

rs th

emse

lves

, not

a b

roke

n po

litic

al s

yste

m. O

vera

ll, 5

3% s

ay th

e po

litic

al s

yste

mw

orks

just

fine

, and

that

ele

cted

off

icia

ls a

re th

e ro

ot o

f the

pro

blem

s in

Con

gres

s; 3

7% s

aym

ost m

embe

rs o

f Con

gres

s ha

ve g

ood

inte

ntio

ns, a

nd it

’s th

e po

litic

al s

yste

m th

at is

brok

en (3

7%).

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

12/1

9

Ther

e ar

e on

ly m

odes

t par

tisa

n or

dem

ogra

phic

diff

eren

ces

on th

is q

uest

ion,

thou

ghm

oder

ate

and

liber

al R

epub

lican

s an

d le

aner

s ar

e so

mew

hat m

ore

likel

y th

an o

ther

part

isan

and

ideo

logi

cal g

roup

s to

say

pro

blem

s ar

e sy

stem

ic (4

7% s

ay th

is, c

ompa

red

wit

hno

mor

e th

an 3

8% o

f tho

se in

oth

er id

eolo

gica

l gro

ups)

.

��

The

vast

sum

s of

mon

ey fl

owin

g in

to th

e 20

16 p

resi

dent

ial e

lect

ion

have

onc

e ag

ain

brou

ght a

tten

tion

to th

e is

sue

of c

ampa

ign

finan

ce.

This

issu

e re

sona

tes

broa

dly

wit

h th

e pu

blic

: 77%

of A

mer

ican

s sa

y th

ere

shou

ld b

e lim

its

on th

e am

ount

of m

oney

indi

vidu

als

and

orga

niza

tion

s ca

n sp

end

on p

olit

ical

cam

paig

nsan

d is

sues

. Jus

t 20%

say

that

indi

vidu

als

and

orga

niza

tion

s sh

ould

be

able

to s

pend

free

lyon

cam

paig

ns.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

13/1

9

The

perc

epti

on th

at th

e in

fluen

ce o

f mon

ey o

n po

litic

s is

gre

ater

toda

y th

an in

the

past

isal

so w

idel

y sh

ared

. Rou

ghly

thre

e-qu

arte

rs o

f the

pub

lic (7

6%) b

elie

ve th

is is

the

case

,w

hile

abo

ut a

qua

rter

(22%

) say

s th

at m

oney

’s in

fluen

ce o

n po

litic

s an

d el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls is

littl

e di

ffer

ent t

oday

than

in th

e pa

st.

And

as

the

pres

iden

tial

cam

paig

n co

ntin

ues,

nea

rly

two-

thir

ds o

f Am

eric

ans

(64%

) say

that

the

high

cos

t of r

unni

ng a

pre

side

ntia

l cam

paig

n di

scou

rage

s m

any

good

can

dida

tes

from

run

ning

. Onl

y ab

out t

hree

-in-

ten

(31%

) are

con

fiden

t tha

t goo

d ca

ndid

ates

can

rai

sew

hate

ver

mon

ey th

ey n

eed.

Bro

ad c

once

rns

abou

t mon

ey in

pol

itic

s –

and

the

spec

ific

wor

ry th

at c

ostl

y ca

mpa

igns

disc

oura

ge w

orth

y ca

ndid

ates

– a

re n

ot n

ew. I

n a

Janu

ary

1988

face

-to-

face

sur

vey,

64%

said

the

high

cos

t of c

ampa

igns

act

s as

a b

arri

er to

man

y go

od c

andi

date

s.

Mos

t Am

eric

ans,

incl

udin

g m

ajor

itie

s in

bot

h pa

rtie

s, b

elie

ve th

at n

ew la

ws

wou

ld b

eef

fect

ive

in r

educ

ing

the

role

of m

oney

in p

olit

ics.

Rou

ghly

six

-in-

ten

over

all (

62%

) say

that

new

law

s w

ould

be

effe

ctiv

e in

lim

itin

g th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itic

s; 3

5% s

ay n

ew la

ws

wou

ld n

ot b

e ef

fect

ive

in a

chie

ving

this

goa

l.

��

Opi

nion

s on

cam

paig

n fin

ance

and

its

effe

cts

on th

e po

litic

al s

yste

m a

re w

idel

y sh

ared

;m

ajor

itie

s ac

ross

dem

ogra

phic

and

par

tisa

n gr

oups

say

ther

e sh

ould

be

limit

s on

cam

paig

n sp

endi

ng, t

hat m

oney

’s im

pact

on

polit

ics

has

incr

ease

d an

d th

at th

e hi

gh c

ost

of c

ampa

igns

is d

rivi

ng a

way

goo

d ca

ndid

ates

.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

14/1

9

Part

isan

diff

eren

ces

on a

ll th

ree

mea

sure

s ar

e m

odes

t. R

epub

lican

s an

d R

epub

lican

-le

anin

g in

depe

nden

ts (7

2%) a

re le

ss li

kely

than

Dem

ocra

ts a

nd D

emoc

rati

c-le

anin

gin

depe

nden

ts (8

4%) t

o sa

y th

at th

ere

shou

ld b

e lim

its

on c

ampa

ign

spen

ding

. How

ever

,su

ppor

t for

spe

ndin

g lim

its

is h

igh

even

am

ong

cons

erva

tive

Rep

ublic

ans

and

lean

ers

–ro

ughl

y tw

o-th

irds

(68%

) thi

nk th

ere

shou

ld b

e lim

its

on h

ow m

uch

indi

vidu

als

and

orga

niza

tion

s ca

n sp

end.

Dem

ocra

ts a

nd le

aner

s ar

e so

mew

hat m

ore

likel

y to

say

that

the

high

cos

t of c

ampa

igns

toda

y di

scou

rage

s go

od c

andi

date

s: 6

8% s

ay th

is c

ompa

red

wit

h 62

% o

f Rep

ublic

ans

and

lean

ers.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

15/1

9

Whi

le m

ost A

mer

ican

s be

lieve

that

new

law

s w

ould

be

effe

ctiv

e in

red

ucin

g th

e ro

le o

fm

oney

in p

olit

ics,

ther

e ar

e ed

ucat

iona

l and

par

tisa

n di

ffer

ence

s in

how

wid

ely

thes

e vi

ews

are

held

.

Fully

thre

e-qu

arte

rs o

f tho

se w

ith

post

-gra

duat

e de

gree

s sa

y ne

w la

ws

wou

ld b

e ef

fect

ive

in th

is r

egar

d, c

ompa

red

wit

h 57

% o

f tho

se w

ith

no m

ore

than

a h

igh

scho

ol e

duca

tion

.

Mor

e D

emoc

rats

and

lean

ers

(71%

) tha

n R

epub

lican

s an

d le

aner

s (5

8%) s

ay th

at n

ew la

ws

wou

ld b

e ef

fect

ive

in li

mit

ing

the

influ

ence

of m

oney

in p

olit

ics.

Non

ethe

less

, maj

orit

ies

acro

ss a

ll ed

ucat

iona

l and

par

tisa

n ca

tego

ries

say

that

new

law

s co

uld

be w

ritt

en th

atw

ould

eff

ecti

vely

red

uce

the

role

of m

oney

in p

olit

ics.

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

16/1

9

Nex

t: 7.

Vie

ws

of th

e po

litic

al p

artie

s an

d ho

w th

ey m

anag

e go

vern

men

t

← P

RE

V P

AG

EN

EX

T P

AG

E →

Fact

s ar

e m

ore

impo

rtan

t th

an e

ver

In ti

mes

of u

ncer

tain

ty, g

ood

deci

sion

s de

man

d go

od d

ata.

Plea

se s

uppo

rt o

ur re

sear

ch w

ith a

fina

ncia

l con

trib

utio

n.D

ON

ATE

45

67

89

1011

1213

14

RE

PO

RT

MA

TER

IALS

Com

plet

e R

epor

t PD

F

Top

line

Que

stio

nnai

re

Trus

t in

Gov

ernm

ent,

1958

-201

5

201

5 G

over

nanc

e Su

rvey

Dat

aset

TAB

LE O

F C

ON

TEN

TS

Bey

ond

Dis

trus

t: H

ow A

mer

ican

s Vi

ew T

heir

Gov

ernm

ent

1. T

rust

in g

over

nmen

t: 19

58-2

015

2. G

ener

al o

pini

ons

abou

t the

fede

ral g

over

nmen

t

3. V

iew

s of

gov

ernm

ent's

per

form

ance

and

role

in s

peci

fic a

reas

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

17/1

9

4. R

atin

gs o

f fed

eral

age

ncie

s, C

ongr

ess

and

the

Supr

eme

Cour

t

5. P

oliti

cal e

ngag

emen

t and

vie

ws

of g

over

nmen

t

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

off

icia

ls a

nd t

he ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itic

s

Few

say

ele

cted

offi

cial

s pu

t the

cou

ntry

’s in

tere

sts

befo

re th

eir o

wn

Top

prob

lem

s of

ele

cted

offi

cial

s

Elec

ted

offic

ials

see

n as

‘int

ellig

ent,’

not

‘hon

est’

View

s of

ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d vi

ews

of g

over

nmen

t

Com

prom

isin

g w

ith th

e ot

her p

arty

Mor

e pe

ople

bla

me

law

mak

ers

than

the

polit

ical

sys

tem

View

s of

the

role

of m

oney

in p

oliti

cs

Bip

artis

an s

uppo

rt fo

r lim

iting

cam

paig

n sp

endi

ng

7. V

iew

s of

the

polit

ical

par

ties

and

how

they

man

age

gove

rnm

ent

8. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f the

pub

lic's

voi

ce in

gov

ernm

ent a

nd p

oliti

cs

9. V

iew

s of

the

natio

n, h

ow it

's c

hang

ing

and

conf

iden

ce in

the

futu

re

10. G

over

nmen

t and

taxe

s

11. H

ow g

over

nmen

t com

pare

s w

ith o

ther

nat

iona

l ins

titut

ions

Met

hodo

logy

Appe

ndix

A: W

hy p

artis

ans

incl

ude

'lean

ers'

RE

LATE

D

RE

PO

RT

|M

AR

10

,1

99

8

How

Am

eric

ans

Vie

w G

over

nmen

t

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

18/1

9

RE

PO

RT

|M

AY

17

,2

02

1

Am

eric

ans

See

Bro

ad R

espo

nsib

iliti

es fo

r G

over

nmen

t; L

ittl

e C

hang

e Si

nce

2019

RE

PO

RT

|A

PR

18

,2

01

0

Dis

trus

t, D

isco

nten

t, A

nger

and

Par

tisa

n R

anco

r

RE

PO

RT

|A

PR

11

,2

01

9

Litt

le P

ublic

Sup

port

for

Red

ucti

ons

in F

eder

al S

pend

ing

TOP

ICS

Trus

t, Fa

cts

& D

emoc

racy

MO

ST

PO

PU

LAR

FE

ATU

RE

|O

CT

14

,2

01

7

Are

you

a C

ore

Con

serv

ativ

e? A

Sol

id L

iber

al?

Or

som

ewhe

re in

bet

wee

n? T

ake

our

quiz

to fi

nd o

ut

FA

CT

SH

EE

T|

MA

Y6

,2

02

1

Publ

ic O

pini

on o

n A

bort

ion

DA

TAE

SS

AY

|S

EP

2,

20

21

Two

Dec

ades

Lat

er, t

he E

ndur

ing

Lega

cy o

f 9/1

1

SH

OR

TR

EA

D|

MA

Y6

,2

02

1

Abo

ut s

ix-i

n-te

n A

mer

ican

s sa

y ab

orti

on s

houl

d be

lega

l in

all o

r m

ost c

ases

SH

OR

TR

EA

D|

AU

G1

3,

20

21

9/9/

21, 1

1:26

AM

6. P

erce

ptio

ns o

f ele

cted

offi

cial

s an

d th

e ro

le o

f mon

ey in

pol

itics

| Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cen

ter

http

s://w

ww.

pew

rese

arch

.org

/pol

itics

/201

5/11

/23/

6-pe

rcep

tions

-of-e

lect

ed-o

ffici

als-

and-

the-

role

-of-m

oney

-in-p

oliti

cs/

19/1

9

AB

OU

T P

EW R

ESEA

RC

H C

ENTE

R P

ew R

esea

rch

Cent

er is

a n

onpa

rtis

an fa

ct ta

nk th

at in

form

s th

e pu

blic

abo

ut th

e is

sues

, att

itude

s an

d tr

ends

sha

ping

the

wor

ld. I

t con

duct

s pu

blic

opi

nion

pol

ling,

dem

ogra

phic

rese

arch

, med

ia c

onte

nt a

naly

sis

and

othe

r em

piric

al s

ocia

l sci

ence

rese

arch

. Pew

Res

earc

h Ce

nter

doe

s no

t tak

e po

licy

posi

tions

. It i

s a

subs

idia

ry o

f The

Pew

Cha

ritab

le T

rust

s.

Copy

right

202

1 Pe

w R

esea

rch

Cent

erAb

out

Term

s &

Con

ditio

nsPr

ivac

y Po

licy

Rep

rints

, Per

mis

sion

s &

Use

Pol

icy

Feed

back

Care

ers

Mig

rant

enc

ount

ers

at U

.S.-

Mex

ico

bord

er a

re a

t a 2

1-ye

ar h

igh

1615

L S

t. N

W, S

uite

800

Was

hing

ton,

DC

2003

6

USA

(+1)

202

-419

-430

0 |

Mai

n

(+1)

202

-857

-856

2 |

Fax

(+1)

202

-419

-437

2 |

Med

ia In

quiri

es

RES

EAR

CH

TO

PIC

S

Polit

ics

& P

olic

y

Inte

rnat

iona

l Affa

irs

Imm

igra

tion

& M

igra

tion

Rac

e &

Eth

nici

ty

Rel

igio

n

Gen

erat

ions

& A

ge

Gen

der &

LG

BT

Fam

ily &

Rel

atio

nshi

ps

Econ

omy

& W

ork

Scie

nce

Inte

rnet

& T

echn

olog

y

New

s H

abits

& M

edia

Met

hodo

logi

cal R

esea

rch

Full

topi

c lis

t

FOLL

OW

US

Em

ail N

ewsl

ette

rs

Fac

eboo

k

Tw

itter

Tum

blr

You

Tube

RSS

From: Niloufer MackeyTo: MDOS-CanvassersCc: D S Mackey; Christopher RohwerSubject: Misleading summary: Secure MI VoteDate: Thursday, September 9, 2021 4:33:00 PM

CAUTION: This is an External email. Please send suspicious emails [email protected]

To: Board of CanvassersRe: Misleading Summary for Secure MI Vote Petition

We are writing to express our deep concern about the misleading summary proposed for theSecure MI Vote petition by the group responsible for this petition. Here are some of thereasons:

1. The summary states that the petition will "protect the right to vote and increaseconfidence in the conduct of elections by requiring photo identification". We stronglyfeel that this claim is actually false. Photo ID is already required.

2. The summary also states that the petition will increase voter participation. This claim isalso false, see item 3 below.

3. The summary omits any mention that the proposal prohibits election officials fromsending absentee ballot applications unless formally requested. This is not onlymisleading, but it will decrease rather than increase voter participation.

4. The summary also states that the petition prohibits special interest funding of elections. This is also misleading because the petition prohibits all private funding, includingsupport from non-partisan groups who might want to provide emergency funds with nostrings attached to county clerks offices.

Thank you.

Niloufer Mackey, 3013 Bobolink Lane, Kalamazoo, MI 49008Steve Mackey, 3013 Bobolink Lane, Kalamazoo, MI 49008Mary Lou Rohwer, 6024 Texas Drive, Kalamazoo, MI 49009To

report on the november 2020 election in michigan

Documents